LIBRARY 


OF THE 


UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 


RECEIVED BY EXCHANGE 


Class 


The University of Chicago 


FOUNDED BY JOHN Ὁ. ROCKEFELLER 


ἘΠῚ ᾿ 5 : 
ANCIENT SINOPE 


A DISSERTATION 


SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS 
AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE 
q OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 


(DEPARTMENT OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE) 


BY 
DAVID M. ROBINSON 


OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 


OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE) 


RARy 
OF THE © 


UNIVERSITY 
ΟΕ 


SCALIFORNIKA 


BY | 
DAVID M. ROBINSON 


υ 


ὃς. 


eee 


STF 


He 


are 


y if 
» “-- " 
Ν ‘ 
Υ 
x Ύ { 
ee 
ig - 
. 
rm 
: -α 
κι 
ὶ ᾿ 
mt 
ne ; 
‘ ν 4 i ‘eo 
ὡς . 
> : , 


ee, 


OF THE 


- 7 Ἂ 
{ UNiveRSitTy 
C4, 


OF 
LIFORNIA 


{Reprinted from AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, Vol. XXVII, No. 2.] 


I.—ANCIENT SINOPE. 


First PART. 
INTRODUCTORY NOTE, 


No monograph on Sinope has been written since 1855. In that year, when 
interest in the Black Sea towns had been for some time stimulated by the 
Crimean war, and Sinope had been forced into temporary prominence by a 
naval battle near the town between the Turks and Russians, appeared W. T. 
Streuber’s historical sketch (Sinope, ein Historisch-Antiquarischer Umriss, 
Basel, 1855). It was marred by many mistakes, and the author could not avail 
himself of the numerous inscriptions and coins which have since thrown so 
much light upon the city’s annals. Many of the best histories of Greece and 
of the Greek colonies, moreover, have been written during the half-century 
that has elapsed since that time. In 1902, while I was studying as fellow at 
the American School in Athens, Professor Edward Capps suggested that I use 
the opportunity to make a thorough investigation of all material connected with 
ancient Sinope and, if practicable, embody the results in a connected account. 
Kindly letters from Professor Edward Meyer of Berlin and Professor George 
Busolt of Géttingen encouraged me to make the attempt. After much prelim- 
inary study I went in June, 1903, to live in the town itself, made journeys 
in different directions through the immediate locality and sought to quicken 
and unify my investigations into a living, historic portrayal. How far I have 
‘succeeded the reader must judge for himself. 

The indebtednesses of the author are of course many and varied, as the 
notes and references indicate. In addition to the geographical works cited on 
page 126, mention should be made of the brief Sinopicarum Quaestionum ἢ 
Specimen by M. Sengebusch (Berlin, 1846), of the article by Six on coins of 
Sinope in the Numismatic Chronicle for 1885, of the general histories, and 
especially of Eduard Meyer, Geschichte des Kénigreichs Pontos, and Reinach- 
Gétz, Mithradates Eupator. The ancient sources and other modern works 
will be found cited throughout the paper. 


165253 


126 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, 


CHAPTER I. 


THE SITE. 


The configuration of the country round Sinope, its geographic 
position, its products, the security of its double harbor, and the 
impregnability of its rocky promontory, have conspired to write 
its name in the annals of war, of commerce, of popular and 
governmental independence and development, and of biography, 
literature, and art. 

The northern coast of Asia Minor is like a central mounting 
billow with a trough on each side. The billow and the two 
troughs taken together, form the entire southern shore of the 
Pontus, and the outline is symmetrical, so that the crest of the 
wave is the middle point of the shore. The crest, however, 
is somewhat flattened, and just at its eastern edge, before it 
begins to fall away, it throws out a bold promontory.’ From 
the eastern corner of this main promontory’ juts out in a north- 
easterly direction the smaller peninsula on whose low landward 
neck Sinope is built.° 

The peninsula itself is a promontory,’ about 600 feet in height, 
with precipitous sides and a broad level table-land at the top. 
Its outline somewhat resembles that ofa boar’s head with the 


1Called Syrias in Marcian, Epitome Peripli Maris Interni. 9; but Lepte 
in Arrian, Peripl. 21; and Syrias Acrulepte in the anonymous Periplus 
Ponti Euxini 20. Cf. Miiller, Geographi Graeci Minores I, pp. 571, 387, 406. 
The modern Turkish name is Indjé-burun. 

3 Geographi Minores, pl. XVIII. 

8 Cf. Strabo XII 545 ἵδρυται γὰρ ἐπὶ αὐχένι Χερρονήσου; cf. Polybius IV 56, 
οἰκεῖται δ᾽ ἐπί τινος Χερρονήσου προτεινούσης εἰς τὸ πέλαγος, ἧς τὸν μὲν αὐχένα τὸν 
συνάπτοντα πρὸς τὴν ᾿Ασίαν, ὅς ἐστιν οὐ πλεῖον δυοῖν σταδίων, ἡ πόλις ἐπικειμένη 
διακλείει κυρίως. τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν τῆς Χερρονήσου πρόκειται μὲν εἰς τὸ πέλαγος, ἔστι 
δ᾽ ἐπίπεδον καὶ πανευέφοδον ἐπὶ τὴν πόλιν, κύκλῳ δ᾽ ἐκ θαλάττης ἀπότομον καὶ 
δυσπροσόρμιστον καὶ παντελῶς ὀλίγας ἔχον προσβάσεις; Herod. IV 12; Eust. 
Commentarii 248, 773, 970; Plut. Luc. 23. 

4 Several travellers and geographers mention this promontory, which to-day 
is called Boz-tepé (gray hill), a name which is also applied to the Greek 
quarter of Sinope, just outside the walls of the Turkish village, itself called 
Sinub or Sinob or Sinab; and also to the eastern cape where the modern 
lighthouse stands: cf. Meletios, Geographie p. 482; Ritter, Kleinasien I, 
pp. 784, 794 ;, Hommaire de Hell, Voyage en Turquie et en Perse. II, p. 344 ff; 
Rottiers, Itineraire de Tiflis 4 Constantinople, p. 275; Taitbout de Marigny, 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 127 


highest point at the snout in the extreme east. Itis about two miles 
in length and one mile in width at the widest part. It appears to 
have been of volcanic formation and, judging by the cretaceous 
over the volcanic deposits, to have been at one time below the 
level of the sea and afterwards heaved up slowly into its present 
position. The rock is evidently of volcanic nature and is of the 
same quality with those in eastern Anatolia. In the north central 
part of the nearly level plateau there still exists a lake which is 
at present very shallow, but which probably is an old crater.’ 
Such geologic formation, after decomposition by the weather, 
has considerable fertility.2. At the time of my visit cows, horses, 
and goats were pasturing upon the short grass. There were also 
abundant wild flowers and shrubbery, including juniper and laurel. 
Under the conditions of an ancient siege the produce of the entire 
area might support a considerable army even when all other 
supplies were cut off. Water also would be abundant. A short 
distance down the slope by which the promontory descends to 
the town,’ there is a cave in which there is an underground stream 
of cool, drinkable water.‘ Both the inflow and the outflow are 
secure from pollution. An underground passage-way leads from 
the cave down to the town. Its date is later than the Greek or 
Roman period, but the idea of reaching the hidden water in this 
protected way might have suggested itself at any time. There 
are springs also on the plateau itself,° one of which in the 


Pilote de la Mer Noire et de la Mer d’Azov, p- 159; Tozer, Turkish Armenia 
and Eastern Asia Minor, p. 7. A view of Sinope and Boz-tepé from the 
southeast is given in Tournefort, Relation d’un Voyage du Levant II. 
lettre 17, p. 203; Reclus, Nouvelle Géographie Universelle IX, p. 566 
(with map and photograph of Sinope); Jaubert, Voyage en Arménie et en 
Perse, p. 394; cf. also page 128, note 4 of this paper and Mannert, Géographie 
6, 3, 15. 

1 This is the opinion of Brauns, who wrote a good article on the geology 
of the peninsula of Sinope, entitled Beobachtungen in Sinope, in the 
Zeitschrift fiir allgemeine Erdkunde N. F. II (1857), p. 28 ff. He gives a good 
geological map. 

° Cf. Strabo XII 545, ἄνωθεν μέντοι καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως εὐὔγεών ἐστι τὸ ἔδαφος 
καὶ ἀγροκηπίοις κεκόσμηται πυκνοῖς, πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον τὰ προάστεια. 

5. Cf. Polybius IV 56. 

* The cave to-day is called ‘ Byzana’ by the Greeks, because the water seems 
to flow from breasts. A religious ceremony is performed there in the spring- 
time. Perhaps Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, p. 312, refers to this cave. 

®> The modern town gets its water from the peninsula; cf. Hamilton, op, 
cit. p. 312. 


128 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


southeasterly portion sends its stream out horizontally from a 
hillock into a sarcophagus of Roman date bearing a Greek 
inscription.’ | 

While the general outline of the promontory may be compared 
toa boar’s head, its steep bristling sides have caused it to be likened 
to a petrified hedgehog.? The action of the sea against rocks of 
varying hardness, such as trachyte, black volcanic breccia, red 
chalky scaglia, also varying greatly in density, shelly limestone, 
and sandstone,* has left a mass of sharp projections around the 
coast. Down at the water-line, and below the surface, the sea has 
hollowed out caves and water-filled holes, the ‘‘ Choenicides”’ of 
Strabo. Upon such a shore® it was almost impossible to effect 
a landing, and still more difficult to reach the easily defended 
plateau above. 

Descending ina ἜΤΕΙ ΡΟ direction along the axis of the 
promontory, we cross through the low neck, narrowed by the 
double harbor to about a quarter of a mile® in width and ascend 
to the mainland, a region of extraordinary beauty and fertility. 
Southward the foreground shows scattered areas of wheat, barley, 
corn, rice, and other grain interspersed with vineyards and 
orchards of fruit-trees of the widest variety. There are apples, 
pears, figs, peaches, plums, medlars, apricots and cherries. The 
last are natives of this southern shore and are believed to have 
been carried from this place of origin to Italy and thence to other 
lands. Cerasus, a colony of Sinope on this same shore,’ got its 
name from the abundance of its cherry-trees.* The olive tree 


1Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 315, no. 44. 

2 Cf. Reinach-Gétz, Mithradates Eupator p. 352 and the epithet ἐχενώδης 
applied to the rock in Strabo XII 545. Cf. also Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 14. 

3 Cf. the article of Brauns, p. 28 ff. and Hamilton, op. cit. p. 312 for the 
geology of the promontory of Sinope. 

*Cf. Strabo XII 545. καὶ κύκλῳ δ᾽ ἡ Χερρόνησος προβέβληται ῥαχιώδεις ἀκτὰς 
ἐχούσας καὶ κοιλάδας τινὰς ὡσανεὶ βόθρους πετρίνους οὃς καλοῦσι χοινικίδας. πλη- 
ροῦνται δὲ οὗτοι μετεωρισθείσης τῆς θαλάττης, ὡς καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ εὐπρόσιτον τὸ 
χωρίον καὶ διὰ τὸ πᾶσαν τὴν τῆς πέτρας ἐπιφάνειαν ἐχινώδη καὶ ἀνεπίβατον εἶναι 
γυμνῷ ποδί. For the Choenicides, cf. Hamilton, op. cit. p. 310 and Ritter, 
Kleinasien I, p. 776. 

δ Orph. Argonautika 757, τρηχύν τ᾽ αγκῶνα Σινώπης ; Polyb. IV 56, 5 and note 
4 on this page. 

6 Cf, Polyb. ibid., ov πλεῖον δυοῖν σταδίων. 7Xen. Anab. V 3, 2. 

®Athen. II 51a; Plin. N. H. XV 30; Ammianus XXII 8, 16; Steph. 5. 
Κέρασος Eust. 1], ΤΙ 853; Hehn, Kulturpflanzen und Hausthiere,® pp. 327, 
345 f. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 129 


was anciently more abundant than now,’ and Sinope is its west-. 
ward limit on the Pontus.’ I saw but few groves,’ whereas Strabo 
seems to think of the whole region as covered withthem. Further 
away in the background and to the eastward and westward are 
noble forests of oak, pine, walnut, chestnut, maple, elm, beech, 
ox, cypress, and other trees, with an undergrowth of shrubs. 
There are also many of the latter out inthe open. In the distance 
is the purple, waving outline of the mountain rampart, which 
separated the old Greek civilization of the coast from the barbarian 
people of the interior,‘ and, in fact, performs a similar function to- 
day. The mountainous district, however, must not be thought 
of as rugged and unfertile; for, on the contrary, it is like the 
maritime plain, richly productive, the mountain slopes and valleys 
especially possessing a high degree of fertility. 

The exact area of the territory of the state of Sinope® cannot 
now be determined. It was much less than that of the province 
of Paphlagonia to which it belonged,® whether the eastern limit of 
that province be drawn at the Thermodon, the Iris, or the town 
of Amisus;’ for Strabo indicates a separation between the district 


1Cf. Strabo XII 546, ἅπασα δὲ καὶ ἐλαιόφυτός ἐστιν ἡ μικρὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς θαλάττης 
γεωργουμένη and 73, τὰ δὲ τῆς Σινώπης προάστεια καὶ τῆς ᾿Αμισοῦ καὶ τῆς Φάναροίας 
τὸ πλέον ἐλαιόφυτά ἐστι; Cf. Eust. Il. II 853. 

2Xen. Anab. VI 4, 6, and Jaubert op. cit. p. 395 “ Plus prés de Constan- 
tinople ’humidité du sol et l’inconstance des vents empéchent que cet arbre 
délicat ne prospére”’. Perhaps the southwestern wind that blew from Phrygia, 
called βερεκυντίας was the cause of the growth of the olives at Sinope; cf. 
Aristotle 973 a, 24; frag. 238, 1521 Ὁ, 17. 

8 On Boz-tepé just outside the Greek quarter as you go toward the Quarantine 
Station, Nesi Kieui, there is to-day a grove of olives, and there are some on the 
mainland, but the tree is not in favor among the present inhabitants. 

4Cf. Cic. de Rep. 2, 4. 

>The name of the city itself is Σενώπη. L. and S. give a short ε, but cf. Hero- 
dian, περὶ ’Opfoypadiac ed. Lentz II 580, 26. Xenophon says also ἡ Σινωπέων 
πόλις. The name of the Sinopean district is in Xen. (Anab. V 6, 11) ἡ Σινωπέων 
χώρα, in Strabo (XII 546, 561 and elsewhere) ἡ Σινωπῖτις or Σινωπίς. Steph. 
Byz. gives also Σινωπίς and Σινωπικόν, The male inhabitant is Σινωπεύς, 
Herodian, ed. Lentz II 891, 27, or Σινωπίτης (cf. Dion. Orb. Descr. 255 and 
Herodian, ed. Lentz I 77; 11 869, 37), in Latin Sinopensis or Sinopeus; the 
female inhabitant Σενωπίς (cf. Herodian II 891, 1). The adjective is Σινωπεκός 
(Steph. Byz.). Σινωπαῖος occurs in Ὁ. I. G. 7074. 

6Xen. Anab. VI 1, 15. Σινωπεῖς dé οἰκοῦσι μὲν ἐν TH Παφλαγονικῇ. So also 
Strabo XII 544f., Diodorus XIV 31, Pliny N. H. VI 2 and Arrian, Peripl. 
20, 21. 

7 Herodotus I 72 and Strabo XII 1, 1; 3,9, 25 seem to make the Halys 
the eastern boundary, but Scylax and Marcian, the river Evarchus. In Xeno- 


130 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


-of Amisus and the district of Sinope at the river Halys,’ still 
further to the west. On the other hand it is equally clear that 
Sinope did not extend its power westward to the Bithynian 
border. Nature erected a southern limit in the Olgassys moun- 
tains.’ Perhaps we should not be far from the truth if we bounded 
the ancient Sinopean district by the Pontus on the north, the Halys 
on the east, the Olgassys mountains on the south, and an indefinite 
line on the west drawn at about the 32nd parallel.’ 

Returning to the town on the neck of the promontory we find 
upon the site of the ancient city an inner walled enclosure with 
a Turkish castle and prison, probably the site of the Sinopean 
acropolis, and outside the wall northeastward, toward the pro- 
montory, the Greek and Christian quarter.° Unhappily there are 
few certain data for reconstructing the ancient city. Looking 
down from the height above I tried in vain to make a mental plan 
which would include the stoas, gymnasium, and market-place,° 
the Palace of Mithradates,’ and the Temple of Serapis. There 
are no ruins or even any mounded outlines for points of departure. 
However, we have the two walls across the isthmus which have 
been built and razed and rebuilt in the same positions and out of 
the most heterogeneous materials arranged in the most disorderly 
manner. There are foundation stones from buildings; columns 
of Roman date whose unfluted sides indicate their previous 
position in stoas ;* pieces of sculpture scattered at random, including 
a lion built into the top of the wall, in one case, while a similar 
one lies upon the ground ;° and pieces of architraves and of: cor- 


phon’s time the Thermodon was the boundary. Plin. VI 2 makes Amisus a 
city in Paphlagonia. Ptolemy makesa mistake when he (V 4 and VIII 17, 26) 
includes Sinope in Galatia. It belonged later to the Roman province of 
Bithynia and Pontus, but never to Galatia (cf. on this Cumont, Revue des 
Etudes Grecques XVI (1903), pp. 25-27. 

‘Cf. Strabo, XII 546, 560; Arrian Peripl. 22; Anonym. Peripl. 25. 

2 Strabo, XII 546. 3 Strabo, XII 561, 562. 

*Armene, fifty stadia to the west, was part of Sinope: cf. ᾿Αρμήνην τῆς 
Σινώπης, Xen. Anab. VI 1, 15; Strabo, XII 545. But the district of Sinope 
certainly extended still further west. 

5 Cf. the geographers and travellers quoted above. 

® Cf. Strabo XII 546 αὐτὴ δ᾽ ἡ πόλις τετείχισται καλῶς, καὶ γυμνασίῳ δὲ Kai 
ἀγορᾷ καὶ στοαῖς κεκόσμηται λαμπρῶς. 

7 What the inhabitants call “the Palace of Mithradates”,a large structure in 
Boz-tepé with three vaulted chambers and a Byzantine chapel in its midst, is 
of later date than Mithradates. Hamilton, op. cit. p. 312 refers to it. 

§ Perhaps they come from the stoas mentioned by Strabo. 

*Cf. Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. p. 346; Hamilton, op. cit., p. 309. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 131 


nices. Many other pieces of carving have been carried away by 
individuals or have found their way into museums, especially that 
- at Constantinople. In the wall nearest the mainland, but on the 
inside, are arches indicating the remains of a Roman aqueduct.’ 
This part of this wall is better built than the rest and probably 
goes back to Roman date, whereas the greater portion of it, like 
the other walls, was built by the Genoese and later by Turks. 

The main factor in the making of Sinope, as in the making of 
Cyzicus, has been its double harbor? commanding the eastward 
and westward sea and in both ancient and modern times the best 
on the southern shore of the Pontus. In ancient times the 
southerly harbor was improved and ruins exist of a mole*® which 
seems to be as old as Mithradates the Great. No river flows into 
either harbor to silt it up, but the northerly harbor has been 
shallowed by sand deposits and is no longer usable by vessels of 
modern draft. The deeper water and the lighter draft vessels of 
the ancient day, however, made it accessible for commercial pur- 
poses.* It may be that even in the time of Pericles and later in 
the days of Mithradates the northerly harbor was deep enough 
for their full-sized craft. 


CHAPTER II. 


IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE. 


It may well be believed that, however unimportant, through 
distance and misrule, Sinope may have come to be in the eyes of 
our western world, the ancient Greeks would hold in high esteem 
a city-state so fertile, so fortified, and so far-reaching in its 
natural command of the land and of the sea. An examination 


1 Cf. Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. p. 346; Hamilton, op. cit. p. 309; Ritter, op, 
cit. p. 789-790; cf. also Pliny Ep., X gr. 

2 Cf. Strabo XII 545, ἑκατέρωθεν δὲ τοῦ ἰσθμοῦ λιμένες. 

3 Taitbout de Marigny, op. cit. p. 159; Hamilton, op. cit. p. 310. 

*In his epitome of the journey of Menippus, Marcian of Heraclea 9 speaks 
of an island lying off Sinope, κεῖται δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων νησίον, ὃ καλεῖται Σκόπελος. 
Ἔχει δὲ διέκπλουν τοῖς ἐλάττοσι πλοίοις, τὰ δὲ μείζονα περιπλεῖν δεῖ καὶ οὕτω 
καταίρειν εἰς τὴν πόλιν. loi δὲ τοῖς περιπλέουσι τὴν νῆσον πλείους ἄλλοι στάδιοι μ' 
(Miller, Geog. Gr. Min. 1,0. 571). An anonymous Byzantine writer(Miiller, p. 
407) of the fifth century uses the same words, doubtless derived from the same 
source, which is of about the time of Augustus. But the only island existing 
to-day at Sinope is a small low-lying rock off the promontory, mentioned by 
Taitbout de Marigny, op. cit, p. 159, the détour of which could not possibly 


132 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


of their literature shows that such was the actual fact. Strabo * 
and Diodorus? thought it the most notable and important of all 
cities on the southern shore of the Pontus. Mela® joins it with 
Amisus as one of the two most famous cities of the whole region. 
Valerius Flaccus‘ calls it “great and wealthy”, Eutropius° 
“most noble” and Stephanus of Byzantium’ and Eustathius’ 
“most eminent”. Among later writers, Ammianus® and 
Phrantzes® class it among important cities of antiquity. 

More significant testimonies, however, are watermarked rather 
than expressed. Plautus’ Curculio (v. 443) sneers at the Jeno 
that he, all by himself, within the last twenty days has conquered 
half of all the nations, including Persians, Paphlagonians, 
Sinopeans, Arabs, Carians, Cretans, etc. But while his whole 
long list contains the names of so many nationalities the only 
city important enough to be included in the sneer is Sinope. 


increase the necessary sailing distance by more than a small fraction of 40 
stadia. Moreover, the water between this island and the mainland is very 
deep, and even the*largest modern steamer sails boldly through the passage. 
The solution of the difficulty seems to lie in the word νησίον. A peninsula 
was a land island, (χερσόνησος, Halb-insel). The village at the Quarantine 
station on the promontory to-day is called Nesi Kieui (the island village). 
The modern Greeks as a matter of fact at present speak of the whole pro- 
montory as νησί, The confusion between the little island and the promontory 
has extended to modern writers. Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 15 says, ‘“‘ante hune 
portum insula quaedam sita erat, Σκόπελος vocata. Naviculis per fretum 
navigare licebat, quod interillam est et terram continentem, ΧΙ, vel Lstadiorum 
iter; magnae naves onerariae Scopelum circumnavigabant per altum mare, 
LXXX vel LXXXX stadium iter”. And even Ritter (Kleinasien, p. 794), 
following the authority of a Black Sea pilot (Taitbout de Marigny), connects 
the little island with the Scopelus of Marcian, while in an earlier passage (p. 
776) he has made the same word of the same passage refer to the promontory. 
The increased sailing distance of vessels going round the promontory cor- 
responds quite exactly to the 4o stadia of the writer whom Marcian epitomizes. 
(Sengebusch wrongly gives 80 or go stadia.) And διέκπλουν evidently refers 
not to sailing between the little island and the mainland, but simply to the 
passage from the town out through the northerly harbor into the open sea. The 
true interpretation then, of the original writer whom Marcian epitomizes, is 
that vessels of light draft could sail directly out from or directly into the 
northerly harbor, while those drawing more water must circumnavigate the 
promontory for an extra distance of 40 stadia in order to reach the other 
harbor. 

1 Cf. XII 545, ἀξιολογωτάτη τῶν ταύτῃ πόλεων. 

5 XIV 31 μέγιστον εἶχεν ἀξίωμα τῶν περὶ τοὺς τόπους. 

δ Το, 4V 109. 5VI 8. δ Cf. 5. v. Σινώπη. 

7 Eust. Commentarii 773. SXXII 8, 16. * 1-32: 1V 16. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 133 


Sinope was also the name of a prominent courtesan at Athens 
who either took or received the name Sinope in the same fashion 
as other harlots were called Megara and Cyrene.' Nor was she 
a mere individual, or subordinate character, but rather the mistress 
of an establishment of some size, the inmates of which included 
the celebrated Pythionike.* The woman also figured in Athenian 
comedies,* and eyen caused a verbal coinage, σινωπίζειν,, which 
meant “to be debauched or dissolute”. She seems moreover to 
have been a marked figure in Athenian life fora long enough 
period to be called at last Abydos, διὰ τὸ γραῦς εἶναι." 

Sinope, however, has much more reputable associations than 
these. The scholiast, on the Odyssey XII 257, mentions one 
Sinopos as a companion of Odysseus who was engulfed by the 
whirlpool at Scylla and Charybdis.° One of the seven editions 
of Homer was the Sinopic.’ One of the cities whose constitution 
Aristotle thought worthy of a treatise was Sinope.* One of the 
deliberative orations ascribed, however inaccurately, to Isocrates 
was the Σινωπικός The earliest Greek writers’® celebrated the 
mythology of this town. 

We may note in passing that Sinope was considered to be the 
headquarters of the Cimmerians,” that its fortifications were 


1 Sinope was a harlot also in Aegina and Corinth, cf. Athenaeus XIII 595 a; 
Suidas, 5. ‘Eraipa: Κορίνθιαι; Schol. Arist. Plut. 149; Dem. XXII 610; LIX 
1385; Athenaeus XIII 594 a. For fact that harlots as slaves were often 
named after their birth-place, cf. Bechtel, Die Attischen Frauennamen, p. 57 f. 
(Bechtel omits the names of the harlots Sinope and Cyrene. -For Cyrene cf. 
Arist. Thesm, 98; Frogs 1328. 

* Cf, Athenaeus XIII 595 a; Droysen, Hellenismus, I 2, p. 239. 

3 Cf. Athenaeus VIII 339 a; XIII 558 b, 567 f, 586 a. 

*Cf. Apostol. XV 50 in Leutsch-Schneidewin, Paroemiographi Graeci, II, p, 
641; and Suidas, Photius, Hesychius, 5. v. σινωπίζειν. 

5Cf. Athenaeus XIII 558 b, 586 a; cf. Photius, Suidas, Harpocration s. v. 
Σινώπη. 

§Cf. Eustathius 1721, 9; Wilamowitz, Phil. Unters VII 167; Maass, 
(Hermes, XXIII 618) identifies him, rather improbably with Sinon who played 
an important part in the taking of Troy in the Little Iliad. Cf. Virgil 
Aeneid II, 29 and also Paus. X 27, 3. 

?Schol. Il. I 298, 423, 435; 11 258; V 461. Wolf’s Prolegomena, p. 175; 
Pauly, Realencyclop. s. ν. Homerus; Ludwich, Aristarchs Hom. Text-kritik, 
I, p. 4. 

8 Schol. Ap. Rhod. II 948 ; Arist. fr.540, 1567 b23. 9 Cf. Anonym. Vit. Isoc. 

10 Eumelus of Corinth and Hecataeus of Miletus. Cf. Schol. Ap. Rhod. II 
946; Eudocia 5. v. Σινώπη and Arist. 1: ς. 

"Her, IV 12; Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums I, p. 453. 


[34 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOG). 


renowned,' and that its fleet dominated the Pontus and even sailed 
away for contests in other seas.’ 

As a last testimony to the consequence of Sinope, and in order 
to put it in immediate connection with our discussion of the 
commerce of the port in the next chapter, we here note that 
Sinope was a frequent point from which to reckon distances and 
for elucidating geographical relations.’ Although Pteria is not 
near Sinope, as was formerly supposed, but was considerably 
south of it, as Ramsay shows,‘ it was nevertheless spoken of as 
κατὰ Σινώπην, Or as we might say, on the same parallel with Sinope. 
And again, although the narrowest part of Asia Minor was on 
the line from the gulf of Issus to Amisus, the superior importance 
of Sinope led Strabo to draw his line of shortest transit to that 
city and not to Amisus.’ It was from Sinope that Carusa was 
distant 150 stadia,’ Amisus goo stadia,® Phasis 2 or 3 days’ journey® 
and, in the westerly direction, Armene 40 stadia,’” Cape Carambis 
700 stadia,” further away Cytorus 1312 stadia,” Amastris 1450 
stadia,’ Heraclea 2000 stadia“ and the Hieron of Jupiter Urius at 
the Thracian Bosporus, 3500 stadia.” Many places are said to be 
situated “near Sinope ”’, though some of them as a matter of fact 
are not very near it. Abonutichos” is ἄγχι Σινώπης. The Halys” 
and Thermodon”™ are ποταμοὶ περὶ Σινώπην. Heraclea”® was a πόλις 
περὶ Σινώπην. Corocondame”™ was πλησίον Σινώπης. Strabo calls the 


1 Priscianus 751. 2Strabo XII 545. 

* Sinope was the Greenwich of antiquity, cf. Bury, History of Greece, p. 236. 

4 Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor, p. 33, identifies Pteria with Boghaz- 
kieui. Cf.also Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, IV 598 ff, 
Steph. Byz. IIrepia, πόλις Σινώπης. 

> Her. I 76, ἡ δὲ Πτερίη ἐστὶ τῆς χώρας ταύτης τὸ ἰσχυρότατον κατὰ Σινώπην 
πόλιν τὴν ἐν Ἐὐξείνῳ ἸΤόντῳ μάλιστά κῃ κειμένη. There is no reason for conclud- 
ing from this passage that Herodotus visited Sinope, as Matzat, Hermes VI 
416, does. Herodotus certainly visited Phasis and probably got his informa- 
tion from Sinopean merchants there, 

δ Strabo XVI 677. 7Cf. Arrian Peripl. Pont, Eux, 21. 

δ Cf. Strabo XII 547; according to Pliny N. H. VI 2, 1040 stadia (130 miles). 

®Cf. Strabo XI 498. 

Cf. Arrian Peripl. 21; Anonym. Peripl. 21; Marcian Epitome Peripli 
Menippei 9. 

 Marcian op. cit. 9; Strabo XII 546; Schol. Ap. Rhod. IT 945. 

12 Pliny N. H. VI 2 says 164 miles. 18 Marcian, op. cit. 9. 

Strabo XII 546; Marcian op. cit. 9 gives 2040. 

' Strabo ibid.; Marcian ibid., gives 3570. 

‘6 Lucian Alexander 11. 1τ Schol. Apoll. Rh. 2, 366. 

18 Tzetz. Lyc. 647. 19 Tbid. 695. 20 Steph. s. v. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 135 


southern shore of the Pontus τὴν Σινώπης παραλίαν' and Eratosthenes 
speaks of Παφλαγονίας καὶ τῶν περὶ Σινώπην." Livy® locates Gordium 
as a point equally distant from the Hellespont, the Cilician shore, 
and the sea at Sinope. -Cicero’s oratory‘ finds the remotest 
enemies of Rome with whom Verres had communicated at the 
Spanish Dianium on the west and at Sinope on the east. Isocrates*® 
marks the limits of the Greek population in Asia Minor by 
Cnidus and Cilicia in the west and Sinope in the east. Pliny " 
puts it in the fifth segment of the world, while Avienus’ in the 
fifth century A. D. places it near the confines of the earth. 


CHAPTER III. 


THE COMMERCE OF SINOPE. 


The ship’s prow often found upon the obverse of coins of 
Sinope is an indication of its commercial instinct.’ In fact the 
distances given at the close of the last chapter are in the main 
commercial, and lead us on to discuss its trade relations which 
were of the highest importance. To the list of places already 
mentioned we must add the islands of the Aegean, including 
Rhodes’ and Delos, to which votive offerings were shipped,” Attica, 
Greece in general," and even Egypt.” Its coastwise trade covered 


1 Strabo I 46; II 74. 2 In Strabo II 134. $XXXVIII 18, 12. 
4 Or. against Verres, 2, 1, 34. For the idea cf. also Tusc. Disp. 1, 20. 
® Philip, 120; Panegyricus, 162. 5 N.H. VI 216. 


7 Descriptio Orbis Terrae, 951 ff (775) = Miiller, op. cit. II, 185 ‘“‘ propter 
confinia terrae”. ᾿ 

8 Numismatic Chronicle, 1885, pp. 38, 48, pl. II, 15, 19; Zeitschrift f. Num. 
XX p. 273; Head, Historia Numorum, p. 434. 

® Rhodes aided Sinope in its successful resistance of Mithradates II in 220 
B. C., probably because of commercial friendship; cf. Polyb. IV 56. For 
Sinopeans in Rhodes cf. I. G. XII 1. (C. I. G. Ins. I.) 465 ; 466, 467. 

10 Cf. Paus. I 31, 2. 

1 Sinope’s trade relations with the Greek world were so important that it 
adopted the Aeginetan standard for the drachma, Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 41- 

15 The story of the carrying of the image of Serapis to Egypt, told in Tac. 
Hist. IV 83, 84 and elsewhere shows this. Clemens, Orat. Adhort. p. 20, says 
Ptolemy relieved Sinope from famine by a supply of corn. Furthermore we 
know of a Sinopean Demetrius who was a landowner in Egypt, cf. Amherst, 
Papyri II, no. XLII, LV. 


136 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PAILOLOGY. 


the entire shore from the Thracian Bosporus’ to Phasis” and in- 
cluded Heraclea, Cytorus,* Carambis, Ionopolis, Amisus, Cotyora, 
Cerasus, Trapezus,* and many other ports. But I am convinced 
that the volume of direct trade between the northern shore of the 
Pontus and Sinope has been underrated. The fact is that ancient 
navigators could cross the Pontus just at this point without losing 
sight of land for more than a few hours on ordinary days, and on 
very clear days without losing sight of it at all. Writers like 
Reinach® assume that the statement of Strabo,® that both the 
promontory Carambis on the Asiatic side and the promontory 
Criumetopon at the end of the Crimea could be seen from the 
middle of the sea, is an instance of the underestimating of 
maritime distances by the ancients. There is no warrant for 
this criticism, for both promontories can be seen to-day from the 
middle of the sea." This great advantage was available to the 
ancient navigator neither in the wider westward nor in the east- 
ward third of the sea, but only in the central one. To follow the 
coast multiplied the distance greatly. Hence, when the route was 
once established the north shore ships would strike boldly out for 
the central headlands of Asia Minor and for Sinope, the commer- 
cial metropolis of the region. Their goods would then be 
transhipped in Sinopean bottoms to points further east or west, 
or would proceed in the same vessels without shifting of cargoes. 
The statement of Pausanias*® that the first fruits of the Hyper- 
boreans of the opposite territories were carried by the Sinopeans 
to Delos indicates a general commercial route direc}ly across the 
Pontus. It is well known that coins of Sinope stamped with the 
device of the eagle grasping the dolphin have bden discovered 
on the northern shore at Olbia,® and I found atSinope handles 
of amphoras with the same inscriptions as those found in such 


‘A son of Polydorus, a Sinopean, dwelt in Tomi; cf. Am. Jour. Arch, IX 
(1905), p. 331. 

 Polyb. IV 56 says Sinope was situated on the right of the Pontus παρὰ Φᾶσιν. 

3 Strabo XII 544 τὸ dé Κύτωρον ἐμπόριον ἣν ποτε Σινωπέων. 

+ Cotyora, Cerasus and Trapezus were colonies of Sinope; οἵ. Xen. Anab. V, 

ὃ Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit. p. 56. 

6 Strabo VII 309, cf. also II 124; Pliny N. H. IV 86. 

1 The officers of Black Sea steamers volunteered this information to me. 

8 Paus, I 31, 2. 

* Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 34; Streuber, Sinope (Basel, 1855) p. 60. Thesame 
device, borrowed from Sinope probably, occurs also on coins of Olbia itself. 
Cf. Hirst, The Cults of Olbia, J. H. S. XXII p. 263. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 137 


large quantities at ΟἹ Ια. Becker’ assumes from the large number 
excavated there that it was the centre of their manufacture, but 
an equally large number might perhaps be found by excavations 
at Sinope and elsewhere. In any case those that I found still 
further emphasize the commercial relations of Sinope with Olbia 
and the northern shore. An additional evidence of close connection 
between the two shores is found in the similarity of personal 
names.’ Even north shore inscriptions in some cases show the 
names of Sinopean citizens. The general impression made by 
all this evidence is that vessels proceeded from both east and west 
coastwise to the central section of the sea where it was so much 
narrower than elsewhere and then turned directly across it, and 
that a commercial lane was in this way established for the great 
volume of Black Sea trade, which would thus pass in and out at 
the fine harbor of Sinope.® 

A point from which commercial articles were thus distributed 
by sea was likewise a point toward which converged the various 
roads by which the products to be exported were brought in and 
along which at least a certain amount of goods went back to the 
interior districts. The great caravan routes from India,° and the 


1Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 294-300. 

2. Jahrbiicher fiir kl. Phil. Suppl. X, pp. 67, 108 ἢ. 

%Cf. the Prosopographia Sinopensis (to be published in the second part of 
this paper) with index IV 3 in Latyschev, Inscriptiones Antiquae Orae Sept. 
Pont. Eux. 

*Cf. p. 136, note 1; Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca 252, from Panticapaeum. 
Cf. Latyschev op. cit. 1 185, II 298, 299; cf. C. I. L. III 783; Diodorus XX 25 
and Strabo XI 496 also showa close relation between Sinope and the Cimmerian 
Bosporus; cf. Reinach-Gétz, op. cit. pp. 56, 225. The Sinopean historian 
Theopompus also was acquainted with the region; cf. Phlegon, Mirab. c. 19. 
Sengebusch op. cit. p. 34, says ‘alio titulo Olbiano mentio facta est Theogiti 
Sinopensium astynomi’. The inscription is on a vase handle C. I. G. 2085 b 
Geoyeitov ἀστυνόμου ; Σινωπίων. Both Sengebusch and the Ὁ. I. G.are in error, for 
Σινωπίων is the name of the vase-maker; cf. an identical inscription in Becker, 
Mélanges Gréco-romaines I 494, no. 16. For Σινωπίων as a proper name cf. 
also N. Jahrbiicher f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 472, 38, 39; Suppl. V, p. 483, 29; 
Suppl. X, p. 31, 4; p. 35,17; p. 224,2. In Streuber op. cit. p. gt the name of 
the Sinopean citizen Theocles is wrongly given as Theogeitos. 

5 This would explain why in Herod. II 34 Sinope is said to be situated oppo- 
site the mouth of the Ister. A merchant boat going from the Ister to Phasis 
or vice versa would avoid the open sea as much as possible and sail by way 
of Sinope. 

®If goods were not brought all the way to Sinope by land, they were taken 
to Phasis and shipped to Sinope; cf. Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit. p. 216. 


138 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


far east followed such rivers as the Euphrates in the south and | 
theAraxes* in the north, but as they approached the heart of 
Asia Minor, the problem was to get the goods through to the 
Greek and Roman world. Up to the Roman times there was no 
good road from the East through western Asia Minor to the 
Aegean. The old Hittite road, afterwards the Persian postal 
road, served more as a bond between the different parts of the 
Persian Empire than as a means of transporting goods to Greece, 
The well-known Ephesus highway was not yet 011. The great 
eastern system of roads centering in Persia and the great western 
systems centering in Greece and Rome had no good connecting 
links at the coast of the Aegean. The solution of the difficulty 
was in a water route. The best harbor on the southern shore of 
the Black Sea would become the terminal land point of the great 
caravans which seem, in sharp contrast to the present, to have 
contained few, ifany,camels. That harbor was Sinope. To this 
port branch roads were built from the great Persian highways. 
It is true that Sinope had no good direct connection with the 
interior, but its shipping facilities were superior and a coastwise 
road connected it further east with a more favorable point of 
departure for the interior. Sinope’s commerce suffered an inevi- 
table decline when the Roman roads were built and perfected to 
the great cities of the eastern coast of the Aegean, but in the 
earlier times the great Persian net-work of lateral and transverse? 
lines of transit in Asia Minor may be considered, so far as through 
travel is concerned, as in the main converging upon the double 
harbor of Sinope.* 

A study of the roads in the more immediate general district 
serves to complete our picture of it as an isolated and strategic 
point for interior trade connections, having no good landward 
approaches along the coast except from Amisus. Hecatonymus, 


1 Reinach-G6tz, op. cit. p. 225. 

* Cf, Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor, p. 28; Strabo XII 540; XIV 663. 

8 Such a transverse road was that from the Gulf of Issus to Sinope on which 
Pteria was probably situated; cf. Her. 1 72; II 34; but ‘an active man’ could 
hardly ‘ cover the distance in five days’, Cf. also Livy XXXVIII 18; Strabo 
XIV 664; Ps. Scylax 102; Ps. Scymnus 921 f; Plin. N. H. VI 7, and cf. Athen. 
Mitt. XXII (1897), p. 3, note 3; Reinach-Gitz, op. cit. p. 226. Macan, 
Herodotus (bks. ILV-VI) App. XIII, p. 293. 

* Cf. a good article on the roads of the Pontus by Munro in the J. H. 8. 
XXI (1901) pp. 52 ff, pl. IV; cf. also Curtius, Griechische Geschichte, ed. 5, 
vol. I, pp. 405, 408. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 139 


the Sinopean, whom Xenophon’s Ten Thousand met at Cotyora, 
warned him that only by going back into the interior and over the 
difficult mountain roads could he get around into Sinope.’ His 
representations were so convincing that Xenophon had his army 
proceed from Cotyora by water. Similar representations no 
doubt, at least in part, account for his again taking ship from 
Sinope westward. 

It is hardly practicable at present to locate the ancient roads 
close to Sinope. In exploring the back country I found Roman 
mile-stones at a distance of perhaps 25 or 30 miles in a southeasterly 
direction from the town, but they were not in situ, nor were others 
which I found in other directions.” Nor is it possible to tell how 
far the Romans built along the old lines or in new directions. But 
it is probably safe to say ina general way that there were numerous 
highways good and bad reaching into the interior. Certainly 
there must have been bridges at certain points upon the Halys.* 

It is already evident that the goods shipped in vast quantities 
at Sinope were the products in part of the immediate locality, in 
part of the remoter portions of Asia Minor, and in part came 
from the far east. These last, including jewelry, ivory, bronzes 
and oriental luxuries in general,* do not especially concern us 
here, and in attempting to classify Sinope’s exports we shall con- 
fine ourselves to articles from its immediate neighborhood and 
from those interior regions of Asia Minor which found their most 
immediate natural outlet at Sinope. Neglecting numerous minor 
items such as nuts,’ hides,’ grain (small in quantity as compared 


1 Xen. Anab. V 6, 3 ff.; B.C. H. 1gor, p. 41 ff.; Reinach-Gétz, op. cit. p- 
232; Ainsworth, Travels in Asia Minor, vol. I, p. 92. 

*Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 328 f, nos. 75-79. The beginning of no. 75 
can be restored by means of J. H. S. XX (1900), p. 163, no. 7 and C. I. L. 
III, 6895. Read Imp. Caes. C. Aur. Val.] Diocl[etiano P(io) F(elici) Invicto 
Aug. et Imp. Caes. M. Aur. Val.] M[aximia]n[o. The latter part of no. 75 
refers to the three sons of Constantine the Great. So in next to last line read 
ΕἸ. Co(n)sta(nti) nob(ilissimis) C(aesaribus). In no. 76, in which we have a 
case of praes(es) used in a technical sense before Diocletian, we should 
expect in 1. 5 filio eius et Aur. Num(eriano). But the inscription is care- 
lessly cut. 

8 E.g. the bridge which was regarded as a wonder by the Greeks, Ramsay, 
op. cit. p. 31; Herod. I 75. 

4 Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans ]’Antiquité, V, p. 198. 

5 Athen. II 54d; Hehn, Kultur-pflanzen und Hausthiere, 6th ed., p. 380. 

6 Cf. Dem. XXXIV 10; Strabo, XI 493. 


140 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY 


with the product of the northern shore), honey, wax,’ stones for 
gems’ etc. we mention: 

1. Fish. The tunny was most important. Its great spawning 
ground was the vast swampy shores of the palus Maeotis. Strabo’® 
says that, while still exceedingly small, the shoals made their way 
along the coast in an easterly and southerly direction. By the time 
they reached Trapezus and Pharnacia they were of considerable 
size and the first catch was at these points. But those that got 
round to Sinope, were much larger and the hauls were immense, 
though neither fish nor catch was so large as at Byzantium. 
These fish were salted or pickled and sent to Greece, where they 
were a Staple article of diet for the common people.* There seems 
to have been an extraordinary difference in price between Greece 
and Rome, for, however common and cheap they were in Greece, 
Diodorus quotes the price of Pontic fish at Rome as 400 drachmae 
for a small jarful.® There is a vast wealth of other edible fish 
in the Pontus,® such as sturgeon, mackerel, turbot, mullet’ and 
dolphin. But ancient literature seems to mention only the last 
two as caught at Sinope and indeed the last only for its oil and 
the medicinal value of its liver. 

2. Timber. The country around Sinope was covered in ancient 
times, as it is to-day, with a splendid growth of timber which was 
utilized for two main purposes, ship-building and the manufacture 
of furniture.° The ship-timber of the Euxine was celebrated 
among the ancients.’ If Horace’s ship of state were to have the 
utmost staunchness, it must be Pontica pinus, Silvae filia nobilis 


1Polyb. IV 38; Aristotle, Περὶ θαυμασίων ἀκουσμάτων, 831, c. XVII. 
2 Strabo XII 540: Plin. XXXVI12, 45; XXXVII37. For other such articles 
"οὗ export which came mostly from the interior, cf. Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 19 ff. 
and in general on the exports of Sinope cf. Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 16 ff. and 
Streuber, op. cit. p. 50; Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit. p. 227 f. 

ὃ Strabo VII 320. Cf. also Arist. Hist. An. 598f. IX 13; Plin.N. H. IX 15 
47-52; Strabo XII 545 πηλαμυδεῖα θαυμαστά, words still used in Sinope; XII 
549; AelianIV 9; ΙΧ 59; XV 3,5 and 10; Ritter, op. cit. p. 794 ff.; Meyer, 
Geschichte des Altertums, II 345. 

* Cf. Polyb. IV 38; cf. Hermann, Lehrbuch derfGr. Privataltertiimer, ed. 3, 
p. 227, notes 1 and 2. 

*Diod. XXXVII 3, 5: Reinach-Gétz, op. cit. p. 223 wrongly says 300 
drachmae. 

6 For a list of the fish in the Pontus, cf. Pliny, N. H. XXXII 11 ff. 

1Cf. Athenaeus III 118 c; VII 307 Ὁ for Sinopic mullets (κεστρεῖς). 

8 Strabo XII 546; Theophr. Histor. Plant. IV 5, 5. 

9 Catullus IV 9-13; Verg. Georg. II 437. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. [41 


(Od. 114,11). Great quantities of ship-timber doubtless found 
_ their way from the northern shore of the Pontus to Greece by 
way of Panticapaeum, but there must have been a long period 
when, as Strabo indicates, the forests of the neighborhood of 
Sinope sent out through its harbor a large quota of the same 
material. These heavy exports, however, probably were not made 
until after the time of Alexander, for according to Thucydides, ' 
the store-house of ship-timber seems previously to have been in 
the much nearer forests of Thrace and Macedonia. 

As the oak and pine were used for the construction of vessels, 
so the maple and walnut were worked into furniture such as 
couches, and tables.» The maple seems to have been held in 
peculiarly high estimation, tables made from it being ranked 
second to the citrus tables only.® 

3. Olive-oil. Although, as we have stated (p. 129), Sinope was 
the westward limit of the olive, it nevertheless grew abundantly 
in the neighborhood of that town itself,* and the districts east of 
it would bring their product thither for export. The exports of 
Sinope thus competed with those of the more southern countries, 
such as Greece,° in supplying Cappadocia and the western section 
of the southern shore of the Pontus together with the whole 
northern coast.° 

4. Red Earth or Bole. This substance was, in the main at 
least, iron calcined or oxidized into a soft moist clay. The 
ancients gave it many names, such as μίλτος and minium.’” The 
common appellation, Σινωπίς, shows that Sinope was regarded as the 


1Thuc. IV 108; cf. also Hermann, op. cit. p. 436, note 3. 

2 Cf. Strabo l.c.; Eust. Com. 773; Pliny, N. H. XII 31; Theophr. Histor. 
Plant. III 3,1; I1 1,2; V 3,3; 7,6 etc.; Hor. Sat.2,8,10; Martial 14, go; 
Bliimner, Gewerb]. Thatigk. 33, 44, 46, 70, 80. Cf. Ransom, Couches and 
Beds of the Greeks, Etruscans, and Romans, pp. 39,55. The same wonad is 
used to-day by the Turks for the same purpose. 

’ Pliny, N. H. XVI 26; (Οἷς. Verr. IV 17. 

- *Cf. Strabo XII 545, 546; II 71, 73; Eust. Il. II 853. 

>Polyb. IV 38. 

δ Melitene alone in Cappadocia had the olive; cf. Strabo XII 535. Forthe 
lack of the olive on the north shore of the Pontus cf. Strabo II 73, 74; for the 
climate cf. Herod. IV 28; Theophr. De Causis Plant. V 12,11. 

- Strictly speaking, minium is to be distinguished, for it contains oxide of 
lead. But μίλτος and minium are often weg iar as by Strabo XII 540; cf. 
also Pliny N. H. XXXIII 36f. 


10 


142 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


main place of export.’ It is found near Sinope, and in Cappadocia 
its general abundance stains the Halys so deeply that the Turkish 
name for that stream is Kizil Irmak (red river). 

This earthy substance existed, of course, in various other 
localities of the ancient world. Its importance as an article of 
trade and commerce is evident from the Athenian monopoly of 
the Cean product,’? from the sealed packages used for the 
Lemnian article,* and from the care with which different grades 
of it are enumerated.* The most important were the Cean, the 
Lemnian, and the Sinopean.  Theophrastus® considers the Cean 
product better than the others. Pliny® ranks the Lemnian and 
the Sinopean highest, whereas Strabo’ marks the quality of the 
latter as finest, and an interesting papyrus® gives convincing details 
of its superiority in weight, rich liver color, moisture, and freedom 
from grit. The importance of this homely article of Sinopean 
commerce is indicated by its numerous and heterogeneous uses.” 
Its colors varied, but some were intense enough to furnish a kind 
of red ink. It was used as a mineral paint and as an ingredient 
in other paints, being applied to houses, ships, and wood-work 
generally. Its more artistic employments were in decorating 
furniture, wood-carving, terra-cotta figurines and even statues. 
It was no unimportant part of the ancient materia medica, being 
applied externally as a kind of mud-bath and even taken inter- 
nally for various diseases specifically listed by Pliny. An architect 
who desired to use the best material would stipulate in his speci- 


1Strabo, 1. c. ὠνομάσθη δὲ Σινωπικὴ διότι κατάγειν ἐκεῖσε εἰώθεσαν οἱ ἔμποροι; 
Theophr. De Lapidibus 52, κατάγεται εἰς Σινώπην; Pliny Ν, Η. XXXV 13. 
Sinopis inventa primum in Ponto est; inde nomen a Sinope urbe. 

21. 6. II (CIA 11), 546. 3 Pliny, N. H. XXXV 14. 

‘Pliny, N. H. XXXV13. °%DeLap.52. ®L.c. ‘Strabo, XII 540. 

§ Leemans, Papyri Graeci Lugduni-Batavi X 15,11,12,15. Ibid. X 211 tells 
how Sinofis can be mixed with gold, half and half, to double the amount of 
the latter. 

9 Pliny, N. H. XXXV 12, 13, 17, 24, 32; Vitruv. VII 7; Diosc. V 111; Cels. 
De Medicina V 6,6; VI 6, 19; Hesychius 5. μίλτος ; Eust. Com. 1166; Boeckh, 
Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener II® p. 315 f.; Bliimner, Technologie und 
Terminologie IV, p. 480 f. For ships cf, μιλτοπάρῃοι νῆες in Homer; Pliny, 
N. H. XXXIII 38; Herod. III 58; Hermann, op. cit. p. 489, note 8, For the 
use of μίλτος for terra-cottas cf. Lucian Lexiph. 22; B.C. H. XIV (1890), p. 
503, ἢ. 3; Monuments Piot IV (1898), p. 214; for statues Paus. II 2,6; Plut, 
Quaest. Roman., 98, p. 287 b; Xen. Oecon. 10,5; Hermann, op. cit. p. 201 
n.3. Ladies used it for painting their faces; Guhl und Koner, Leben der 
Griechen und Rémer, p. 316. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 143 


fications that certain structural lines be drawn with a pigment 

made of clean oil and Sinopic earth.’ I noted at Corinth crosses 
_ made with Sinopis to indicate the position for columns’ not now 
in situ, and lines drawn with it to indicate how far blocks of stone 
were to overlap the stones in the course below.’ In excavations 
at Miletus the separated drums of columns showed that this sub- 
stance mixed with oil had been used as a cement. 

5. Iron and Steel. Ata general distance of about two hundred 
miles east of Sinope the coast range of mountains draws very 
near the sea. The whole district is rich in copper, iron, and, in 
ancient times, even silver*. Here the Sinopeans, doubtless 
attracted by the rich deposits, founded a prosperous colony. 
Part of the ore was evidently worked into iron and steel imple- 
ments at Cotyora. But another part was doubtless shipped to 
the mother-city Sinope to the manufacturers there ; for Sinopic 
steel® was equally celebrated with the Chalybian, Lydian, and 
Laconian; and it was made into carpenters’ tools, whereas the 
Spartan was used for files, augers, dies and stone-cutters’ tools, 
and the Lydian for similar things, including knives and swords. 
Hamilton® thinks he has located the ancient mines of the 
Chalybians at Unieh. But in any case the steel that passed through 
the port of Sinope was of the finest quality. 

6. Live Stock. There is abundant evidence that Cappadocia 
and Paphlagonia itself nourished great numbers of sheep, goats, 
mules, horses and other domestic animals.’ If we put with this 
fact the statement of Polybius that live stock was extensively 
exported from the Pontus, it becomes evident that shipments of 
this kind were large at Sinope. The word Polybius® uses 


11 G. VII (1. G. Sept. I), 3073 = Dittenberger Syl.? no. 540, ll. 155-160. 
The price was three or three and a half cbols per στατήῆρ, cf. I, G. II, 834”, 
col, I, l. 12 (p. 522) and col. II, 1. 48 (p. 526). 

? As in the long south stoa (Am. J. Arch. VI 1902), Suppl. p. 19. 

8 As in the Greek temple near Pirene, Ibid. pl. XVII, the Greek building 
with a round end (not yet published), the Old Spring, the round basis above 
the spring (ibid. pl. VII), and elsewhere. So Sinopis was used in Greek buil- 
dings as well as in Roman buildings of the Republic. It was also found used 
for the same purposes in fourth century buildings at Epidaurus and Lesbos. 

* Strabo XII 549; Virg. Georg. 1 58; Apoll. Rhod. II τοος f. 

5Step. Byz. 5. v. Λακεδαίμων, Schol. 1]. XIII 218; Eustathius 294, 5 on 1]. 
II 582; Bliimner, Gewerbl. Thatigk. p. 4r; Miiller, Frag. Hist. Graec. 11 442, 
9, frag. from Daimachus. For artisans etc. at Sinope cf. Polyaen. VII 21, 2; 
Diog. Laer. VI 20. . 

® Op. cit., pp. 244, 257. 7Strabo XI 525; Eust. Com. 970. SIV 38. 


144 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


(θρέμματα) as employed in the classifications of the Greeks, 
included slaves (CIG 1709). Lucian (Alex. 9, 15, 17, 45) speaks 
of slaves as differing only in form from cattle. The Paphla- 
gonian slave is a frequent figure in the comedies of Aristophanes. 
The picture of Sinope’s commerce must include its traffic in the 
human species ; droves of captive men and women passed down 
to its fine harbor and were carried in ships to meet the sneers of 
the cultivated comic poets of Athens. 

So great a volume of exports implies a certain amount of 
imports. Salt came from Olbia’ and from the interior of Asia 
Minor’ and wine® from Greece, objects of art also such as 
statues‘ and vases, and in general such refinements of the west 
as well as of the east as the somewhat defective Sinopean culture 
would demand. | 


CHAPTER IV. 


THE FOUNDING OF SINOPE. 


A city of such impregnability, located in so productive a 
region, and at the natural gate-way of so vast a commerce, would 
of course be coveted and fought for. It would have its political 
vicissitudes, its general culture, and its religious cults. It would 
develop its great men. It would weave its name into Greek and 
Latin literature and leave its record in figured coins and in 
inscriptions On stone. In a word, it would have its history, of 
which, in this and several succeeding chapters, we aim to give an 
account. : 

The uncertain figures of Assyrians move in the mist of its 
primitive records. There isa Milesian dawn of Greek colonial 
light quickly clouded by Cimmerian darkness and then rekindled. 
Then come the nearly blank annals of some one hundred and 
eighty years on whose last pages the figure of a barbarian tyrant 
becomes distinct. The Attic rescue follows and the reinforcement 
by Pericles’ six hundred newcolonists. Democratic independence 
displaces tyrannic subjection at Sinope. Anon its colonial depend- 
encies are disturbed and excited by Xenophon’s Ten Thousand 
who have forced their way from the heart of Asia to the sea and 


1 Herod. IV 53; Dio Chrysost. XXXVI 437. 
2Strabo XII 546, 560, 561; Eust. Com. 784. 8 Polyb. IV 38. 
4 Such as the statue of Autolycus by Sthennis, cf. Plut. Luc. 23. 


UNIVERSITY 


145 


along its shore. The great cynic matures the fearless powers 

which Athens admired, ahd the comic poets who woke its 
- laughter, bringing Sinopean culture to its flower in the mother- 
land, arise. With Rhodian help its fortifications resist the 
engines of Mithradates II, but fall before the sudden onset of 
-Pharnaces, his son. The power of the Pontic conquerors brings 
Sinope to the climax of its political strength under Mithradates 
the Great, whose linguistic acquirements were only second to his 
great military genius, which baffled the utmost power of Rome 
for nearly half a century. Then come the days of the inevitable 
Roman yoke, in passing under which Sinope joins the universal 
procession. Then the intricate entanglements of the Middle 
Ages and finally the present Turkish dominion. 

There is no evidence that the early Phoenicians were at Sinope. 
The whole main course of the Phoenician commercial empire 
took its way westward. Its northern and southern movements 
were only short spurs thrown out of the mainrange. Although 
there is at present in the north-western portion and outside the 
walls by the Turkish Hospital and school, Idadie, and near the 
water a quarter of the city called Φοινικίδα, a late local imagination, 
thinking of the spot as one to which the Phoenicians would 
naturally come, may in a fanciful spirit have given it its name. 
Or the name may be due to the palm tree there. 

The early foundations of Sinope are probably Assyrian. The 
extreme antiquity of that great power is constantly receiving 
fresh evidence. The code of Hammurabi is dated ca. 2250 B. Ὁ. 
and it seems evident that more than a millennium later in about 
1100 B. C. the Assyrian power swept westward through Asia 
Minor to the Mediterranean. It is incredible that it should not 
at more than one point have forced its way through the openings 
in the coastwise mountains to the shore of the Pontus. Its kings 
have left no monuments along the sea reciting their personal 
conquests’, but other evidence of the presence of their subjects 
is not wanting. In later times, in the seventh century according 
to Noldeke’, the Assyrian power still extended beyond Sinope 


'Gelzer’s argument (Zeitschrift f. ag. Sprache 1874, p. 118 f) that Mat-qui 
(shore-village) which occurs in Assyrian inscriptions, refers to Sinope, is 
inconclusive, for the word might be intended for almost any coast town in 
Asia Minor. On p. 119 he goes far astray when he says qui or kui comes 
from the name of the founder, Κῶιος, transposing the lines in Scymnus to suit 
his theory. 

* Cf. his article on ᾿Ασσύριος, Σύριος, Σύρος in Hermes V 443 ff. 


146 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


and Furtwangler thinks of Sinope, as being at about that time 
the mediating agent by which Assyrian elements, such as griffins’ 
heads and winged human busts on bronze vessels (cf. Olympia 
Bd. IV, Die Bronzen) came to Greece.’ Coming down to later 
times, we recognize the persistence of its Assyrian origin in 
Sinopic coins with Aramaic inscriptions ;? in Avienus’ mention 
of a “second Syria reaching as far as Sinope” ;* in Tzetzes’ vague 
statement that “everybody calls Sinope Assyria” ;* in the legends 
that the nymph Sinope was the mother of Syros from whom the 
Syrians got their name, and that she was carried off from Assyria ;° 
in the existence at Sinope even now of a sarcophagus with a 
Greek inscription indicating that aman named Syrios was buried 
in it; and in the fact that the promontory mentioned above 
(page 126) was called Syrias. 

The name Sinope itself evidently antedates Greek settlement, 
for mythology and tradition indicate, not the colonizing of an 
uninhabited locality, so much as the taking of the place from 
previous inhabitants. Strabo’ says that Autolycus took posses- 
sion of (κατέσχε) Sinope, a word whose usage generally indicates 
seizure or capture. Plutarch* says outright that Autolycus took 
the town from the Syrians. Apollonius of Rhodes’® says that the 
Argonauts came tothe Assyrian land where Zeus had established 
Sinope, daughter of Asopus, etc. In listing those who in early 
times inhabited Sinope, Ps. Scymnus ” speaks of “‘ Sinope, a city 
named after one of the Amazons, who dwell near by, which 
formerly the native-born” Assyrians inhabited, and afterwards 
the Greeks who went against the Amazons, Autolycus and 


1 Meyer s. Kappadokien in Ersch und Griiber, Encyclopddie and in his 
Geschichte des Altertums II, p. 225 says there is no monumental evidence. 
But Furtwangler holds there is, cf. Die Antiken Gemmen III, p. 68. 

* Cf. Six, Numismatic Chronicle, 1885 and 1893, p. 7; cf. also Head, Hist. 
Num. and Brit. Mus. Cat. 

ὃ Miiller, Geogr. Min. II, p. 187, vs. 1153. 

4 Chiliad, 12, 917 τὴν δὲ Σινώπην σύμπαντες καλοῦσιν ᾿Ασσυρίαν. 

5Eust. in Miller, Geogr. Min. II, pp. 352-353, §775 {; Eudocia’s ᾿Ιωνιά 
DCCCLXII; Diodorus IV 72, 1, 2; Schol. Apoll. Rhod. II 948; Et. Mag. 
5. Σινώπη. 

6 Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 315. 

TXII 545. 8Plut. Luc. 23. 

9 Argonautica II 948 ff; cf. also Scholium and Herod. II 104. 

10Vs. 941-952 (Miiller, Geogr. Min. I, p. 236). 

"JT adopt Meineke’s emendation, éyyeveic. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 147 


Deileon and Phlogius, Thessalians”. Scylax' ina loose way calls 
Sinope a place in Assyria. Wiainckler’s’ conjecture that “ Leuco- 
syri” did not originally mean white Assyrians, as Strabo * thinks, 
but rather incorporates a corruption of “ Lukki”’, the name of 
certain Assyrians mentioned in the Tell-El-Amarna tablets, is 
unlikely. The Assyrians of the north were probably of a lighter 
complexion than those of the south. 

The derivation of the name Sinope perhaps goes back to the 
Assyrian deity Sin, the moon-god, whose numerical symbol was 
thirty, in allusion to the period of the moon, and who was the 
patron of brick-making and building. The worship of the moon 
along the southern shore of the Pontus was more important than 
elsewhere in the Greek world.‘ Assyrians were perpetually 
compounding the names of towns and persons with the name of the 
God Sin, and in view of the powerful early influence of Assyria, 
nothing is more likely than that Sinope would be one more example 
of such compounds. 

If now we recognize the founding of Sinope as Assyrian’° it will 
not seem difficult to dispose of the prominent and persistent myth 
concerning the nymph Sinope. Greek writers would prefer a 
Greek to an Assyrian origin of their colony. Although such an 
etymology has not been mentioned before, I venture to connect 
the name with σίνομαι, to seize or carry off. This would be the 
most natural connection of ‘“‘Sinope”’ for those who found the 
word already on the ground and were ignorant of or wished to 
ignore its Assyrian etymology. On this derivation may have 
been built up the manifold forms of the rape of the nymph Sinope. 
Hardly anything is constant in the story except the item of seizure. 
The God who carries her off is sometimes Zeus, sometimes Apollo, 
sometimes Poseidon, sometimes the river-God Halys. Her 
parents are sometimes Asopus and Metope, sometimes Ares and 


?Scylacis Caryandensis Periplus 89 (Miiller, ibid. p.66). Soalso Nicephorus 
(Miller, Geogr. Gr. Min. II, p. 464) and Nicolaus Damascenus (Hist. Graeci 
Minores ed. Dindorf) p. 32, 7. 

?Winckler, Die Thontafeln von Tell-El-Amarna (Schrader, Keilinschrift- 
liche Bibliothek Bd. V) 28, 10: Winckler, Die Vélker Vorderasiens (Der Alte 
Orient, vol. I), p. 23. 

5 ΧΙῚ 544, XVI 737. 

1 Cf. Roscher s. v. Luna, especially the worship of Μὴν Φαρνάκου. In one of 
the inscriptions I discovered at Sinope Selene is mentioned along with Helios 
and Hermes and other deities, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 323. 

δ And this is the opinion of Blau, op.cit., Mévers, Die Phénizier, and others, 
though not of most modern scholars. 


Rs: 


148 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


Aegina or Parnasse. Sometimes she is carried off from Assyria 
and sometimes from Boeotia.1 Sometimes she deceives her cap- 
tor by exacting a blank promise to give her whatever she should 
ask and afterwards fills in the blank with her own virginity. Some- 
times she has children. But she is always seized and carried off. 
And this unfailing feature seems to show the source of all the 
stories to be in the already present but misinterpreted name of 
the town.’ 3 
To this Assyrian town the enterprising Greeks of Miletus, 
attracted by the mineral wealth of the eastward shores and led to 
the location by the advantages of its harbor, penetrated at a very 
early period. The date is difficult to fix, but may perhaps be 
approximated in the following fashion. Sinope must have existed 
before 756," for Trapezus, its colony,* was founded in that year. 
Eumelus of Corinth, moreover, in writing up the Argonautic 
expedition, enriched it with geographical details which included 
Sinope by name. There is nothing extant of this work of Eume- 
lus, but his mention of the town is cited by the Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 
II 946. Now Eumelus wrote in the latter half of the eighth century 
B.C. Sinope must therefore have been reached by Greeks 
before that time. Thus again we are pointed to some period in 
the first half of the eighth century such as Eusebius’ date (II 80e 
Schone) for Trapezus indicates, at least thirty or thirty-five years 
earlier than 756 B. C., 790 or 785 8. C.,° thus leaving a few years 


1 Probably because the Minyans, with whom the Argonautic expedition was 
associated, dwelt in Boeotia. 

2Cf. Plut. Luc. 23; Apoll. Rhod. II 946-967. The scholia to the latter 
(Miller, Frag. Hist. Graec. II 161; 348, 2; III 29, 3), give excerpts about the 
nymph Sinope from Andron of Halicarnassus, Andron of Teos, Artemidorus, 
Eumelus, Aristotle, Hecataeus, and Philostephanus. Cf. also V. Flaccus, 
Argon. V 106-120; Dionysius Per. vs. 772-779 (Miiller, Geogr. Gr. Min. II 
p. 153); scholia to Dion. Per. (Miiller, ibid. II, p. 453); Eust. Com. 772-774 
(Miller, ibid. II, p. 351); Nicephorus, Γεωγραφία συνοπτικῆ, 782 f. (Miller, ibid. 
II, p. 464); Diodorus IV 72,1,2; Ps. Scymni Periegesis, vs. 941 f. (Miiller, 
ibid. I 236); Avienus, vs. 951 f. (Miiller, ibid. II 185); Et. Mag. s. v. Σινώπη; 
Eudocia’s ᾽Ιωνιά DCCCLXII, περὶ Σινώπης. Sometimes Sinope appears as an 
Amazon and the story is told that she drank much and hence was called Σανάπη, 
which in the Thracian dialect (which the Amazons spoke) means “ drinking 
much”, And Sinope is a corruption of Sanape; cf. the above references. 
_ %Eusebius, Vers. Arm. Ol. 6, 1; Hieronymus, Ol. 6, 1. 

Xen. Anab. IV 8, 22, 

>Curtius, Gr. Geschichte I,° p. 407, puts the first foundation in 790 B. Ο.; 


‘Abbott, A History of Greece, I, p. 340 about 770 B. C.; Uuncker, Gesch. d. 


Altert. 1,5 p. 462, 466; V° 507 and Biirchner, Die Besiedelung der Kiisten des 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 149 


of prosperity before the Cimmerian inroad in 782 mentioned by 
Orosius,' in which probably Habrondas,’ its leader, was killed.’ 
We must assume that Sinope revived after the destroying nomad 
tide had swept through in order to account for its founding of 
Trapezus in 756. What the fortunes of the Greek contingent 
were for the subsequent century and more, we have no means of 
knowing. They probably included many vicissitudes connected 
with the various incursions of the Cimmerians from the northern 
shore,* one of which penetrated even to Sardis, surprising and 
plundering the town, and another to Magnesia. However, in 635 
B. C., there seems to have been an extraordinarily strong and 
powerful body of these barbarians driven down by thestill stronger 
nomad Scythians. This body all but destroyed Sinope,’ so that 
its reinforcement in 630 or 629, according as we follow Hieronymus 
or Eusebius (II 89 n Schone) was looked upon as a second found- 
ing, and Sinope, like Cyzicus, was said to have been founded 
twice.® 


Pontos Euxeinos durch die Milesier, p. 49 and Streuber op. cit. about 785. 
Grote, History of Greece II” 101, note 64 considers improbable the foundation 
of a Milesian colony at so early a period. Perhaps the first colony was only a 
small settlement for trade; cf. Busolt, Gr. Gesch. I, p. 466 and Reinach-Gitz, 
op. cit. p. 18. Beloch, Gr. Gesch., says nothing about the first founding; cf. I, 
p- 192-3 forsecond founding. Holm, The History of Greece I, p. 275 and Meyer, 
Gesch. des Altert. I 406 and II 285 give both colonies. There is a great deal 
of uncertainty about this early period of Greek history and we cannot be sure 
of dates; but the evidence, including Scymnus whose source, Demetrius of 
Callatia, was good, points to a double founding. 

17 21, 

? The name of the leader is variously given. Habrondas seems more likely 
to be correct than Ambron or Abron. Meineke, Step. Byz. (Berlin, 1849), 
p- 571 made the suggestion. 

3Ps. Scymnus V 947. 

*For the Cimmerians cf. Herod. IV 11,12; I 6, 15,16; Strabo, I 1,6; I 
2,20; 13,61; III 2,149; XI 494; XIV 648. 

δ Herod. IV 12 says φαίνονται δὲ οἱ Κιμμέριοι φεύγοντες ἐς τὴν ᾿Ασίην τοὺ 
Σκύθας καὶ τὴν Χερσόνησον κτίσαντες, ἐν τῇ νῦν Σινώπη πόλις Ἑλλὰς οἴκισται. The 
νῦν does not necessarily mean that no Greek city existed when the Cimmerians 
came, as Grote and Busolt loc. cit. think. There may have been a weak 
settlement there at the time. 

§The second founding was by Cretines and Cous (cf. Phlegon in Miiller, 
Frag. Hist. Graec. III 605,6; Eust. ad Dionys. Com. 772; and Ps. Scymnus 
v. 949.) Acc. to Ps. Scymnus loc. cit., it took place ἡνίκα ὁ Κιμμερίων κατέδραμε 
τὴν ᾿Ασίαν στρατός, that is, in the epoch year of the capture of Sardis (657), 
cf. Rohde, Rhein. Mus. XX XIII 200. If this date is right, then it was not the 
inroad of the Cimmerians in 635 but an earlier one which settled at Sinope. 


150 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


The few definite points which we have thus far been able to 
deduce with anything like certainty, and the dearth of any records 
at all to cover nearly two succeeding centuries, may naturally 
occasion scepticism as to there having been any such early found- 
ing at all by the Greeks. But the extreme antiquity of the stories 
of the Argonauts and of Heracles’ expedition against the Amazons, 
both of which have for their scenes the shore of the Black Sea, 
and in both of which Autolycus, the recognized founder of Sinope, 
and his companions had part,’ joins with the strong tradition we 
have been using to.assure us that we are dealing with an historic, 
even if not with a precisely ascertained, founding of the great 
Euxine trading port. 


CHAPTER Ve... 


DaRK AGES AND RENAISSANCE. 


Even after Sinope’s refounding in 630 its records for nearly 
two centuries are for the most part blank annals. The Lydian 
monarchy rose, reached the Halys, and fell. But whether its 
broad lines of display and vanity penetrated the mountain passes 
and subjected the shore cities is left in doubt.’ Pteria taken by 
Croesus lay 150 miles to the south and there are no records 
of any further northward march. Cyrus broke the Lydian power 
about 550 B. C.; but how soon or how decisively the Persian 
power subdued the Greek cities of the southern coast of the 
Euxine is unwritten. Xerxes’ expedition in 480 B.C. included 


1 Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, Encyl. II 763 ff. Only Strabo, XII 545, (source per- 
haps Eumelus) makes Autolycus a comrade of Jason, Cf. also Apollod. 1, 9, 
16, 8. Plut. Luc. 23 says that ‘‘ Autolycus, son of Deimachus, was on the 
expedition of Heracles from Thessaly against the Amazons, When he was 
returning with Demoleon and Phlogius he was shipwrecked at Sinope and 
took the city away from the Syrians”. Appian Mithr. XII 83 says the same. 
Cf. also Ps. Scymnus v. 944 f; Anon Peripl. Pont. Eux. 22, Apollonius of 
Rhodes combines the two traditions and (II 948-967) says that the sons of 
Deimachus, Deileon, Autolycus and Phlogius, comrades of Heracles, were 
picked up by the Argonauts when they came there. V. Flaccus, V 106-120 and 
Hyg. Fab. 14 have the same. Phlogius is mentioned in an inscription found 
at Sinope, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 306, no. 31. On these heroes cf. Roscher’s 
Lexicon and Biirchner, op. cit. p. 58 and on the Argonauts in general the . 
dissertation by Griiger, Die Argonauten-Sage (Breslau, 1889). For Heracles 
at Sinope cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 305. 

*Cf, Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums I § 487, who thinks not. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 51 


among its total of 1200 ships 80 contributed by the Greeks on 
the Hellespont and the Pontus,’ It is natural to suppose that 
Sinope was represented among the eighty, but there is no 
written evidence of such a fact. Some few rude’ coins bearing 
an eagle and a dolphin and a mere incuse square on the reverse 
are archaic enough to represent this obscure period of Sinope’s 
story when the great tides of conquest were sweeping to and fro 
far south of its mountain fences, 

In the fifth century relief expeditions began to be sent to the 
Greek cities of the Black Sea which were under tribute to Persia. 
Aristides, about 470, did not get so far as Sinope. But later, 
probably soon after 444,° in the flowering time of Athens, Pericles, 
with the design of making a display of Athenian power, and in 
order to relieve the Greek cities on the Euxine from oppression and 
to stimulate their trade with Attica, led forth an expedition which 
reached Sinope. Here he left the efficient Lamachus with thir- 
teen ships and assigned him the task of expelling the tyrant 
Timesilaus.* The man°’ who at Syracuse advised the Athenians to 
fight at once seems to have performed his task with characteristic 
promptness, and not long afterwards it was voted at Athens that 
six hundred volunteer colonists should sail for Sinope to occupy 
the houses and lands of the defeated tyrant and his following. 
Lamachus can hardly have remained long at Sinope: we find 
him in 424 B. C. leading another Black Sea expedition which was 


1Diod. XI 3. 

*Num. Zeitschrift II, p. 259; Six, Num. Chron. 1885, pp. 8, 9, 9, 20. 

8 Abbott, A History of Greece, II, p. 375, says “after 449 B.C”. Kohler, Urk, 
zur Gesch. d. Delisch-Attisch. Bundes., p. 114 f. puts the expedition in the year 
453. Duncker, Des Perikles’ Fahrt in den Pontus (Sitzungsberichte der Berl. 
Acad., XXVII 1885), p. 536, gives the year 444/3 B.C. Busolt, Griech. 
Geschichte II 538 (ed. of 1888), gave the same date but later, in III 585, n. 2, 
argues against this date and gives 436/5 B.C. Beloch, Gr. Gesch. I 504, gives 
the same date. Meyer, Gesch. des Alt, IV 430, says after 440. Kirchner, 
Prosopogr, Att. 11811 gives 437 B.C. But I see no conclusive reason for put- 
ting the expedition so late. Plut. Per. 20, places it immediately after that to 
the Chersonesus in 447. If we accept the date 436 there are 34 years between 
the first and second expeditions and only 12 between the second and third. 
In 415 Lamachus was 50 or 55 years old (cf. Plut. Alcib. 18). That would 
make him about 25 or 30 years old at the time of the expedition to the Pontus, 
if it was circ. 440. 

#Plut. Per. 20. 

5 Cf. Busolt, 1. c., for the identification of Lamachus, who died in 414 before 
Syracuse, with the man left in Sinope by Pericles. 


152 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


wrecked at Heraclea.! But from this time Sinope’s condition was 
greatly improved, even its coins showing much finer work- 
manship.’ 

Between Lamachus’ deposition of the tyrant Timesilaus about 
444 B.C. and the Peace of Antalcidas, which deliberately left the 
Euxine Greeks at the mercy of Persia, lies Sinope’s golden day 
of autonomous prosperity and power.’ Not that we possess the 
direct recital of it, but the indirect evidence is conclusive. When 
Xenophon’s veterans climbed the coast range and saw the sea, it 
was Trapezus, a colony of Sinope, that lay directly beneath their 
eye on the coast. Although some 250 miles east of Sinope, it 
owned allegiance to it and paid tribute in common with Cerasus 
and Cotyora.® That Sinope’s colonial arm reached so far may 
not indeed warrant Perrot and Chipiez® in calling Sesamus, Cy- 
torus, and Ionopolis actual colonies of Sinope, and “multiplied ” 
harbors may be too strong an expression; but it is evident that 
Sinope had a firm colonial system covering nearly the whole 
southern shore of the Euxine. Its compactness is illustrated in 
the speech madeto Xenophon by Hecatonymus, who had come all 
the way from Sinope to deal with the Ten Thousand when he says’ 
‘“‘ These (Cotyorites) and the people of Cerasus and Trapezus bring 
us an appointed tribute; so that whatever harm you do them, the 
city of the Sinopeans considers that it suffers it itself’. There may 
have been a lack of Greek unity in the failure of the Cotyorites to 
receive the Ten Thousand more cordially, but Xenophon’s 
soldiers appear to have behaved somewhat roughly and the 
colonists may well have been suspicious * of so large and powerful 


1Thuc. IV 75. 2 Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 21. 

3 Strabo, XII 546, seems to extend Sinope’s autonomous period far onward to 
the capture of the city by Pharnaces in 183 B.c. But either he wrote in 
partial ignorance of the results of the Peace of Antalcidas or the autonomy he 
had in mind was a partial and defective one; for, not to speak of other evi- 
dence, the embassy to Darius with which we deal in the next chapter shows a 
clearly acknowledged general submission to Persia. 

*Xen. Anab. IV 8, 22. 

5 Xen. Anab. V5, 10. The inhabitants of these two places were later 
deported by Pharnaces to form Pharnacia, cf. also Diod. XIV 30, 3; Ps. 
Scymnus 910; Strabo XII 545 f.; and Biirchner, Die Besiedelung des Pontos 
Euxeinos durch die Milesier, pp. 56-66. 

6 Histoire de l’Art, V, p. 197. 7 Xen. 1. ς. 

8 A similar feeling may account for Xenophon’s ships going a few miles past 
Sinope to Armene, as though there were an objection to his anchoring, as he 
naturally would, at that excellent harbor itself. Cf. Xen. Anab. VI I, 15. 


ANCIENT SINOPE, 153 


a force with so adventurous a history back ofthem. In any case 
the incident does not affect our view of the unity of Sinope’s 
colonies among themselves. A further evidence of Sinope’s 
‘independence, may be seen in Xenophon’s warning’ to Heca- 
tonymus against an alliance of the Sinopeans with the Paphla- 
gonians. His words presuppose the desire of the Paphlagonians 
to get possession of Sinope and their inability hitherto to do so. 

The numismatic testimony is interesting. We now for the 
first time find Sinopean coins bearing the names of magistrates,’ 
or rather the first letters of the names. The inscription on one 
is Ε Καὶ, which suggests Hecatonymus’, on another XOPH which 
suggests Χορηγίων and on another AEQM which probably stands 
for Λεωμέδων. Their variety, too, points to a democratic form 
of government. This series comes abruptly. to an end a few 
decades later, and is supplanted by the inferior minting of Data- 
mes, which itself is followed by a still poorer coinage with 
Aramaic inscriptions, some specimens of which bear the names 
of Ariarathes and Abdsasan (not Abdemon).° But short-lived 
as the Greek magistrates’ coinage was, it bears mute testimony 
to Sinope’s brief autonomy. 

There is, moreover, a passage of Strabo which, I think, must 
be referred to this period and discloses in a brief but effective 
way the sea power of Sinope. Xenophon ® shows us that Sinope 
with the help of Heraclea, could upon occasion supply ships 
enough to transport his large force to westward points. But 
Strabo" says: κατασκευασαμένη δὲ ναυτικὸν ἐπῆρχε τῆς ἐντὸς Κυανέων 


θαλάττης, καὶ ἔξω δὲ πολλῶν ἀγώνων μετεῖχε τοῖς Ἕλλησιν. 
Jouns Hopkins UNIVERSITY. DAVID M. ROBINSON. 


! Anab. V 5, 23. Cf. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien, pp. 40, 260. 

? Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 50 gives a list of them. 

3 Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 24. 

*Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 298, 306, 313. 

°Cf. Six, op. cit. p. 25. 6 Anab. V 6ff. TXII 545. 


[Reprinted from AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, Vol. XXVII, No. 3.] 


I—ANCIENT SINOPE. 
SECOND ParT. 
CHAPTER VI. 

SINOPE UNDER PERSIAN RULE. 


Sparta never had a Black Sea fleet or any great ambitions 
there. It was easy for her, when the Athenian sea power was 
broken, to leave Sinope to its fate, and the latter’s independence 
wanes with the waning of Athens. The attack by Datames’ in 
370 B. C. shows us Sinope as no longer a Greek city fighting 
against non-Greeks, but rather as an object of strife between 
some Persians in possession of it and other Persians seeking to 
gain possession. If a Persian satrap ruled a long distance from 
the Great King his loyalty to him was likely to be somewhat 
loose in those days. Datames was anxious to carve out 4 little 
empire for himself in Asia Minor and went beyond his own satrapy 
of Cappadocia into Paphlagonia. After subduing large portions 
of it, his ingenuity conceived against Sinope itself a wily scheme 
which Polyaenus has entered for us in his compilation of strategic 
operations.” Being in need of siege-engines and ships, he tricked 
the old enmity of the Sinopeans against Sestus into furnishing 
him with engineers and mechanics to construct them as if for 
operations against that distant town, but treacherously used them, 
when completed, for a combined land and sea attack upon Sinope 
itself. Artaxerxes Mnemon, getting information of the siege, 


1 Cf. Polyaenus VII, 21, 2, 5. 2 Ibid. 


246 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


ordered Datames off, and he abandoned the siege and withdrew 
his ships by night.’ But we get a glimpse of the perilous position 
of the city in the statement that the Sinopeans dressed their 
women as men and led them about the walls in order to create a 
false idea of numerical strength.?, From all this we gather the im- 
pression of a strong Greek element in the population, but of a 
Persian political preponderance; for Artaxerxes II would scarcely 
have ordered Datames to raise the siege of an unsubdued auto- 
nomous Greek city. 

It is probable, however, that Datames renewed the attack and 
subsequently entered the city. Certainly he succeeded in sub- 
duing large regions of Paphlagonia, including Amisus,* and at 
some favorable season may afterwards have secured Sinope itself, 
which he desired for his capital, The evidence is numismatic. 
The coins with the nymph Sinope on one side and DATA with 
the eagle and the dolphin on the other must be assigned to 
Datames,* and Six’s® argument that these pieces of money do 
not necessarily show that Datames was at any time in power 
at Sinope, but that they were made for him at the time when his 
relations with Sinope were friendly enough to secure mechanics 
and engineers can hardly have much force; for such a personal 
coinage implies possession of personal authority and ambition, 
and any appearance of these qualities would have been very 
carefully avoided by the wily Persian just at that time. The 
simpler and, as I think, the truer view of these coins and those 
of Orontobates, Vararanes, Ariarathes, Abdsasan and others® is 


1 Beloch, Griechische Geschichte II, p. 185 is in error when, referring to this 
attack, he says ‘Sinope fiel nach tapferem Widerstande in Datames’ Hand’’; 
cf. also p. 186, n. 1“ Uber die Einnahme durch Datames cf. Polyaen. VII, 21, 
2,5; Aeneas 40,4”. Others as Meyer op. cit. V, 964 appear to make the 
same mistake, but it is definitely stated in Polyaenus that Datames gave up 
the siege, and the language of Aeneas implies that Sinope was not captured. 
Cf. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien, p. 193 f. 

2 Aeneas 40, 4. 

3 Cf. Polyaen. VII 21, 1; Ps. Arist. Oecon. II 1350 Ὁ; cf. also Meyer 
op. cit., V, 964 and Nepos, Dat. 2-3. 

*Cf. Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Miinzen, p. 6, pl. I, 5; Six, Num. 
Chron, 1885, p. 26, pl. II, 7; 1895, p. 169; Head, Historia Numorum, p. 434; 
Brit. Mus. Cat. of Greek Coins, Pontus. 

5 Num. Chron. 1885, p. 25. 

6 Cf. Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 26 f.; 1895, p. 169; Babelon, Perses Aché- 
ménides, p. LXXX f.; Head, Num. Chron, 1892, 253; Macdonald, Greek 
Coins in the Hunterian Collection, II 236; cf. also Head, Hist. Num. and Brit, 

Mus. Cat. of Greek Coins. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 


that they indicate Persian officials actually in power at Sinope.’ 
Datames died in 362. We must then assign his acquisition of 
power in Sinope, if he did-acquire it, to some time between this 
date and his interrupted siege in 370. 

Sinope’s isolated position keeps its internal condition from 
being wholly clear to us except at such times as some great 
power, being at its zenith, becomes so important as to draw the 
whole ancient world into its light. One of these epochs was in 
the time of Pericles; that of Alexander was another. Appian? 
tells us that Alexander on his great eastward march incidentally 
restored to Amisus by edict its freedom and autonomy, and 
Droysen® surmises that the other Greek cities on the Pontus 
asked him for a similar service, but that their remoteness made him 
unwilling to deviate so far from the line of his larger movement, 
or to suffer the delay necessary to detaching troops for the 
purpose. This would indicate that the Greeks of Sinope were 
ready at any time for an uprising against Persian authority. But 
this is not quite in accordance with the clear inference, to be 
drawn from the definite details of Alexander’s meeting with 
the embassy from Sinope. Among the Mardi, at the immense 
distance of 1500 miles from their own city, these Sinopean Greeks 
had come to the Persian court. They came to meet Darius and 
met Alexander. The great Macedonian did not put them under 
guard as he did the Lacedaemonian envoys to Darius. He told 
them that, being subjects of Persia, they had done right in sending 
ambassadors to its court. He released them on the further and 
express ground that they had not joined in the Greek league 
against himself.t* This incident reveals at least five facts. First, 
it shows the importance of the Greek element in Sinope, for these 
ambassadors were not Persians, but Greeks. Secondly, it shows 
that the Sinopean Greeks were loyal enough to Darius to send 
an embassy to him. Third, it shows that their acceptance of 
Persian authority was not sullen but rather willing, loyal, and 
cooperative. Fourth, the contrast of Alexander’s treatment of 


1Cf. Reinach, Trois Royaumes de 1]’Asie Mineure, p. 10, whose language 
seems to imply a similar view. Cf. also Reinach-G6tz, op. cit., p. 21. 
Abdsasan is right. Head, Six, Num. Chron. 1885, and others give Abdemon. 
But in Num. Chron. 1893, p. 7, Six gives also Abdsasan. 

2 Appian, Mithr. 8, 83. 

* Hellenismus I 1, 247. He cites the case of Heraclea; cf. Memnon (Phot. 
223, 40, c. 4). 

* Cf. Arrian, Anabasis, III 24, 4; Curtius, Hist. Alex. VI 5, 6. 


248 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


them with his treatment of the Lacedaemonians shows that they 
had had no active part in the alliance of the other Greeks against 
him. And fifth, it shows that they were so isolated from the 
affairs of the Aegean Greeks as to be practically neutral, so that 
Alexander could afford to consider them, although envoys to 
Persia, as friends of his own cause. . 

The vicissitudes of Sinope under the divided rule of the 
Diadochi cannot be known.’ Not unlikely anarchy alternated 
with order; for at the close of this period we find the tyrant 
Scydrothemis in power. The name has a barbarian, perhaps a 
Paphlagonian, sound and Tacitus gives him the title of king, 
which is in fact more accurately descriptive than tyrant. Yet on 
the occasion of the mission of Ptolemy to obtain the statue of 
Serapis he calls an assembly of the people, who feel free to oppose 
his plans, and there is no suggestion of any use of troops or other 
force to put them down. We may infer from all this a vague 
general theoretic subjection to the Diadochi, but a practical 
autonomy with considerable democratic liberty and appeal to 
public assemblies.” 


CHAPTER VII. 


SINOPE AND THE PontTic KINGS. 


The practical autonomy of Sinope was one of the results of 
that division among the successors of Alexander which made 
their Empire fall back from its previous limits. Ground was thus 
cleared for the rise of the Pontic kingdom. And we must now 
see in the third century a descent of these barbarians upon the 
Sinopean civilization. The movement, though it is on a smaller 
scale, suggests the barbarian inroads of the Middle Ages. There 
is the same final outward defeat and the same victorious inward 
and permanent invasion of the minds and thoughts of the con- 
querors by the civilizing and organizing genius of the conquered. 
The tradition that when Mithradates, the subsequent founder 
of the Pontic kingdom, was serving with Antigonus, the ruler 
of the Syrian kingdom, the latter dreamed that he sowed gold in 
a field and that Mithradates ran away with the harvest, sufficiently 


1Diod. XVIII 3 tells us that Paphlagonia was given to Eumenes, but 
nothing is said with regard to Sinope itself. 
2Cf, Tac. Hist. IV 83, 84: 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 249 


suggests the young man’s rapid and ambitious appropriation of 
‘knowledge and power which brought him under suspicion and 
led to his flight into Cappadocia, where he made a realm for 
himself and ruled over it and even as far as the eastward coast 
of the Euxine.! Westward, however, the mountain rampart 
behind Sinope again secured its immunity from direct attack 
until the unsuccessful attempt of Mithradates II in 220 B. Cc.’ 

The intervening epoch shows the Hellenic civilization of Sinope 
‘in close relations with the rest of Greece. Significant in this 
connection are the coins which the Sinopeans struck of the Attic 
standard of weight and fineness and bearing a head of Athena 
closely conformed to the Attic type.* Such uniformity in money 
clearly indicates intimate commercial intercourse. The silver 
coins of the Seleucid kings of Syria* also circulated at Sinope 
between about the middle of the third century and 190. These 
two silver coinages in successive circulation at Sinope testify to 
her continuous freedom from the domination of the Pontic kings, 
‘whose fiat bronze money of the same type as that in other Pontic 
villages® was immediately forced upon Sinope as the sole medium 
of exchange when Pharnaces finally took the town in 183 B. C. 
To the numismatic evidence I am glad to be able to add that 
among the inscriptions which Dr. Wilhelm has copied and 
studied there is one of this period from Histiaea in Euboea. 
The inscription is long and much mutilated, but clearly states 
that the Histiaeans extended to ambassadors from Sinope the 
privileges of proxeny and granted ἀσφάλεια, ἀσυλία, ἰσοτέλεια and 
other honors to Sinopeans who came to Histiaea.° There are 
at Athens, moreover, numerous inscriptions which mention the 
names of Sinopeans,’ some of them doubtless of this period. 
These are an excellent though very general indication of transit 
between Sinope and Attica. And, finally, the prompt, generous, 
and effective assistance which Rhodes gave to Sinope when 
attacked by Mithradates II throws a strong light backward and 


? Appian, Mithr. 9; Plut. Demetrius 4; On Mithradates Ktistes cf. also 
Diod. XIX 40; XX 111. 

2 Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 297. 3 Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 43. 

* Ibid., pp. 48-49. 5 Ibid., p. 49. 

δ Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 333. For the first two lines of the inscription 
not given there cf. Wilhelm, Proxenenliste aus Histiaia, in the Arch. Epigr. 
Mitt. aus Oester. 1892, p. 114. 

Cf. I. G. (C. I. A.) IT 3, 3339-3358. 


250 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY 


discloses the previous friendly and trading relations between the 
two peoples. 

That attack itself, though unsuccessful, was the beginning of 
the end of Sinope’s independence,’ for it marks the practical 
recognition by the Pontic kings of the strategic importance of the 
town and of its natural destiny as the capital of the Pontic empire 
At the same time it revealed the resourceful energy of the 
Sinopeans. They promptly built palisades at every point in 
the entire circuit of the promontory at which, in case of a sea 
attack, a possible landing could be made. Their colonies rendered 
efficient help. They also dispatched, as has been indicated above, 
an embassy to Rhodes appealing for help. The Rhodians re- 
sponded at once by making three of their number a committee 
to purchase the needed arms, bow-strings, and engines of war, 
which the Sinopeans took home along with an amount of money. 
They also gave them wine, to the extent of 10,c0o0amphoras.” We 
get evidence of the military strength of Sinope from the fact that, 
with this help, the great power of the Pontic kingdom could not 
capture it. 

When indeed it did finally fall, it was by a sudden and unex- 
pected attack, perhaps in time of peace and through treachery ὃ; 
for details of the capture by Pharnaces in 183 B.C. are significantly 
absent. And there is no evidence of other hostilities at the 
time. Nor does Sinope ever appear to have been taken by a 
protracted siege. It was naturally so nearly impregnable that 
surprise and perfidy were the only available means of capturing 
it. Sinope’s colonies fell with it. Pharnaces deported the in- 
habitants of Cotyora and Cerasus to a spot not far from Cerasus 
and there formed a new colony named after himself, Pharnacea.* 
The Rhodians again showed their sympathy for Sinope’ by 
sending ambassadors to Rome to complain of the fate of Sinope 


1 Polybius IV 56, καί τις οἷον ἀρχὴ τότε Kal πρόφασις ἐγένετο τῆς ἐπὶ τὸ τέλος 
ἀχθείσης ἀτυχίας Σινωπεῦσιν. 

ΣΟΥ, Polyb. 1. c. For δὴ amphora-handle with the name of a Rhodian 
month on it, which I found at Sinope, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 296, 297. 

3Strabo, XII, 545; Reinach—Gétz, op. cit. p. 34; Bevan, The House of 
Seleucus II, 122. 

4 Arrian Peripl. 24 is speaking only in a general way when he says airy 
Φαρνάκεια πάλαι ἹΚερασοῦς ἐκαλεῖτο Σινωπέων καὶ αὕτη ἄποικος. Cf. Hamilton, 
op. cit. 

5 Polyb. XXIV, 10: Livy XL, 2, 20. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 251 


but failed to push the matter.’ Pharnaces also sent ambassadors, 
but in the meanwhile prosecuted his campaign against Paph- 
lagonia, Galatia, and Cappadocia. The Romans sent envoys 
to examine into the situation, but they accomplished nothing. 
However, in 178 B. C. peace was made and Pharnaces retired in 
the main from the districts named, but retained Sinope itself.’ 
About this time he removed his capital from Amasia to Sinope. 
At Amasia below the citadel in the smoothed rock are still to be 
seen the five tombs of the Pontic kings.’ The fifth one is in an 
unfinished state and the conjecture of Perrot* is interesting, that 
this was Pharnaces’® own Sepulchre, the work upon which was 
abandoned for the construction of a new one at Sinope when he 
removed his seat of government to that place. But there are 
no monumental remains at Sinope to testify to the embellishment 
of the new capital by Pharnaces or even by Mithradates the 
Great.® 

Although Pharnaces’ successor, Mithradates III,’ did so much 
for Sinope that he was called Euergetes, his large-hearted and 
enterprising figure appears but briefly on its stage. He sent 
Dorylaus to Crete for mercenary troops and while there the latter 
helped the Gnossians against the Gortynians.° Mithradates III 
also had a share in the third Punic war’ by sending ships to assist 
the Roman fleet, but he was suddenly murdered in his capital,” 
leaving behind him a wife and two boys, the older of whom 
became Mithradates the Great." The limits of the present study 
prevent us from entering into the career of this strange and typical 


1 This was undoubtedly due, as Meyer (Gesch. des KGnigreichs Pontus p. 72) 
suggests, to the fear of injuring their commercial relations with the Pontus. 

2 Cf. Polyb. XXVI 6. 

3 Appian, Mithr. 113 ; Hamilton, op. cit. I 339 ff.; Ritter, Kleinasien XVIII 
154 ff.; Meyer, op. cit. p. 69; Strabo, XII 561; Anderson, Studia Pontica, 
p. 48. 

*Perrot, Guillaume, et Delbet, Exploration Arch. de la Galatie, Bithynie, 
Mysie, Phrygie, Carie, et du Pont, I 371 (cf. pl. 80). Reinach-Gétz, op. cit. 
p. 288, thinks the fifth grave was for the successor of Pharnaces. This seems 
to me unlikely. Cf. next note. 

5 Meyer, op. cit. p. 56 makes Pharnaces the fifth Pontic King. He would 
naturally have the fifth grave. 

ὁ Cf. Lydia Paschkow, Tour du Monde (1889), p. 404. 

7 Reinach-G6tz, op. cit. p. 27. 

8 Strabo, X 477. 9 Appian, Mithr. το. 10 Cf. Strabo, I. c. 

1 The epithet “ Great” does not occur at all in official documents and only 
rarely elsewhere (cf. Suet. Caes. 35 and Eutrop. VI 22). 


252 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


combination of Oriental cruelty and despotism with Greek culture ᾿ 
_ and comprehensiveness. Indeed Reinach’s monograph, which 
tells us of the Greek playmates of his boyhood and of the 
twenty-two languages he could talk and familiarizes us with his 
empire 2500 miles in length and reaching from Greece itself to 
the land of the Colchians, has made such entrance wholly un- 
necessary. We need only note for Sinope’s honor that it was 
‘his birth-place;! that he made it his capital,’ improved its double 
harbor, fortified it and put it in condition to resist the Romans, 
and embellished it with a market-place, stoas, and a gymnasium ;° 
that his phil-hellenic appreciation* led him to make Greek his 
official language,’ and to use Greek models in designing his coins, 
and to make the Sinopean Greek Diophantus his chief-general, 
through whom he freed the Greeks of the Tauric Chersonesus 
from the Scythian tyranny, as is shown by their grateful inscription 
discovered at Olbia.®° The lustre of his character is the lustre 
of Sinopic Hellenism, while his barbarities may reasonably be 
charged to the Pontic and Persian blood which he claimed to 
have in his veins. 


CHAPTER VIII. 


SINOPE UNDER THE ROMANS. 


Sinope does not figure in the first war between Mithradates 
and the Romans. In the course of the second Murena intended, 
following the best advice available, to besiege Sinope as the key 
to the whole country’; but, while still far distant from this strategic 
point, he was defeated at the Halys by the energy of Mithradates.® 
In the third war, however, Sinope is the scene of several im- 
portant events. When Mithradates was forced by Lucullus to 
raise the siege of Cyzicus, he hastened away from the Propontis 


1 Head, Hist. Numorum, p. 423, says Amasia was his birth-place. But Strabo, 
who'was related to Mithradates and himself came from Amasia, and hence 
would have known if Mith. had been born there, says (XII 545) ὁ dé Ἑὐπάτωρ 
καὶ ἐγεννήθη ἐκεῖ (Sinope) καὶ ἐτράφη, διαφερόντως δὲ ἐτίμησεν αὐτὴν μητρόπολίν τε 
τῆς βασιλείας ὑπέλαβεν. 

ΣΟΥ, Strabo, 1. c. and Cic. De Imp, Cn. Pomp. 21(8). For his palace at 
Sinope cf. Diod. XIV 31. 

3 Strabo, l. c. * Bevan, op. cit. I, p. 153. 

5 Reinach-Gitz, op. cit., p. 30. ὁ Cf. Dittenberger Sylloge? 326, 

7 Cf. Memnon 36 (Miller F. H. 6. IIT, p. 544). 

SAppian, Mithr. 65. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 253 


into the Euxine; but a storm destroyed most of his fleet and he 
was obliged to flee in a pirate’s boat to Sinope.’ Thence he 
- sailed to Amisus, leaving Sinope under the control of pirates, led 
by Leonippus.? Meanwhile Lucullus pushed on and finally came 
to Amisus, forced Mithradates to flee into Armenia, and turned 
his forces against the Pontic kingdom in general, taking such 
places as Heraclea. At last in 70 B. c. he appeared before Sinope.’ 

He found the pirates in full possession and confident in their 
sea power, for they had but lately defeated in a decisive battle 
fifteen triremes sent by the Romans under command of Cen- 
sorinus.* The Jeaders of the pirates were Leonippus, Cleochares 

‘and Seleucus. Dissensions existed among them, and Leonippus 
had previously, sometime before the naval attack by Censorinus, 
undertaken to negotiate with the Romans for the betrayal of the 
city to them. But the other two members of the triumvirate 
of pirates had discovered the plot, called an assembly of the 
Sinopeans, and disclosed the treachery of Leonippus. He, how- 
ever, enjoyed the confidence not only of Mithradates but also 
of the people of Sinope and Cleochares and Seleucus were obliged 
to resort to assassination to get rid of him. Soon after this deed 
came the defeat of the Roman fleet by that of the pirates. 

After the victory over the Romans the pirates ruled Sinope 
with a high hand. The insecurity of their position caused Se- 
leucus to propose to Cleochares the delivery of the city to the 
Romans. Cleochares, who favored continued resistance to the 
Romans, objected to the plan, perhaps because it involved the 
massacre of the people. Finally the two men shipped their 
goods to Machares at Colchis at the eastern end of the Pontus, 
intending to follow later themselves. But Machares entered into 
friendly communication with Lucullus. Lucullus agreed to an 
alliance provided Machares would send no provisions to the 
Sinopeans. Machares not only agreed to the proposal but went 
so far as to divert to Lucullus supplies intended for the army 
of Mithradates. Under these circumstances Cleochares himself 
despaired of success against the Romans. He and his followers 


1 Appian, Mithr. 78. Memnon 42 also mentions the storm but is silent 
about Mithradates’ escape in a pirate’s boat. 

2 Memnon 53 (Miller. F. H. G. III, 554) Δεόνιππος δὲ ὁ σὺν Κλεοχάρει παρὰ 
Μιθριδάτου τὴν Σινώπην ἐπιτραπείς. Strabo, XII 546 ὁ γὰρ ἐγκατασταθεὶς ὑπὸ 
᾿ tov βασιλέως φρούραρχος Βακχίδης. 

3 Appian, Mithr. 82, 83. 
*On the name Censorinus at Sinope cf. Am, J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 310. 


254 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


seized what valuables they could, gave their soldiers liberty to 
plunder the town, and fled in their lighter ships by night to the 
eastern end of the Pontus. Before starting, to avoid pursuit, 
they set fire to the remaining ships which were heavier and also 
(according to Plutarch) to the town. The sight of the flames 
apprised Lucullus: of the situation. He ordered his scaling 
ladders against the walls, took the town, put 8000 of the pirates 
and their adherents to the sword, and then by a sudden change 
of plan stayed the slaughter, restored to the inhabitants their 
property; gave the city its freedom, and promoted its welfare. 

The cause of the change was a statue which Lucullus saw 
lying upon the shore or being carried along by the citizens. It 
was wrapped up in linen and bound with ropes. But when un- 
covered at his command it proved to be the statue of Autolycus 
which the final haste of the pirates had prevented them from 
carrying away and which seemed to him to be the exact likeness 
of a figure which had appeared to him in a dream the very night 
before and had said to him “ Go on a little further, Lucullus; for 
Autolycus is coming to see thee”. The coincidence seemed to 
him a divine call to care for the city whose deity had so favorably 
appeared to him. Thus Sinope passed into the power of the 
Romans and the story of its capture reveals one more phase in 
its strange, eventful history, and to almost every other possible 
form of government Sinope has now added a government by 
pirates. The transition to Roman rule marked an epoch in its 
history and a new era was dated from it, stamped on coins as the 
era of Lucullus.’ 

Some years of Roman order and organization, of Roman favor 
and Roman rebuilding, succeeded the anarchic violence of the 
piratical regime.’ But the next striking scene on Sinope’s streets 
was the pomp and splendor of the funeral procession of Mithra- 
dates the Great. His own son, the worthless Pharnaces II, was 
in power in the Cimmerian Bosporus on the northern shore of 


1Qn the capture cf. Plut. Luc. 23; Appian, Mithr. 83,and Memnon’s detailed 
account c. 53, 54 (source Nymphis of Heraclea, 3rd cent. B. c.); cf. also Cic. 
pro lege Manil. VIII 21 ; Oros. VI 3 ; Strabo XII 546, Eutrop. VI 8; Reinach- 
Gotz, Mithr., pp. 352, 353. 

2 Cf. Eckel, Doctrina Numorum II 1, 394; Six, Num. Chron. 1885 ; Head, 
Hist. Num. 

$Plut. Luc. 23 τῆς πόλεως ἐπεμελήθη. Appian, op. cit.; Memnon, op. cit. 
Cic., De lege agr. II 20, 353 shows that Sinope was under the Roman rule in 
the time of Pompey, who succeeded Lucullus in 66 B. c. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 255 


the Euxine. Thither the father, defeated by Pompey, had fled. 
But he met with an unfriendly reception and in despair ended 
his own life with poison and the sword.’ To win the favor of 
Pompey, who was now at Sinope, Pharnaces sent the mutilated 
and all but unrecognizable corpse across the sea to him. But 
that large-hearted conqueror, whose own body, by a strange in- 
justice of history, was to lie upon the Egyptian shore, decapitated, 
mutilated, dishonored and unburied, gave at his own expense 
a magnificent interment to his barbarian enemy. He viewed the 
body with emotion and averted eye and had it laid with marching 
and flute music in the royal tomb at Sinope.” 

For going over to Rome Pharnaces received as his reward 
a kingdom on the northern shore; but it was too narrow for his 
ambitions, and while Pompey was absent in his western war with 
Julius Caesar, Pharnaces crossed the sea and took Sinope from 
Calvinus, who had been given charge of Pompey’s territory. 
There are no details of the capture, but in 47 B. c. Caesar, after 
conquering Pompey at Pharsalus and pursuing him to Egypt, 
marched rapidly against Pharnaces and quickly overthrew him 
in the “ veni, vidi, vici’’ battle of Zela. Pharnaces fled to Sinope 
by way of the Amisus road, made his ignoble agreement there 
with Calvinus that if allowed to depart in safety, he would remain 
upon the northern shore, whither he went to end his career by 
dying in battle, wounded by a personal enemy.’ 

Beginning with Pompey, Bithynia and Pontus were formed 
into one province.‘ He endeavored to improve the condition of 
the cities he captured by giving them better laws and regulations,* 
and we cannot doubt that after his visit to the place Sinope ex- 
perienced the beneficial effects of his attentions. But the im- 
portant event in the city’s improvement was a considerable influx 
of new blood in the colony sent by Julius Caesar about 45 B. c.° 


lt Appian, Mithr. 111,112; Dio Cass. XX XVII 3, 11-13; Plut. Pomp. 41; 
Oros. VI 5; Eutrop. VI 12. 

2 Plut. Pomp. 42; Appian, Mithr. 113; Dio Cass. XX XVII 14. 

* Appian, Mithr. 120; Dio Cass. XLII 46-8; Appian, Bell. Civ. II 91, 92; . 
Plut. Caes. 50; Suet., Jul. Caes. 35, 37; J. H. 8. 1001, p. 59. 

*Strabo, XII 541; J. H. S. 1901, p. 60; and Schoenemann, De Bithynia et 
Ponto, Provincia Romana (Gottingen 1855); cf. also Marquardt, Rémische 
Staatsverwaltung, vol. I, p. 351. 

> Appian, Mithr., 115. 

® Cf. Strabo XII 546; Pliny, Epist. X ΟἹ ‘‘coloniam Sinopensem” ; Pliny, 
N. H. VI 2 ‘‘colonia Sinope”; Appian, Mithr. 120, 121. 


256 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


Another chronological era dates from this time.’ It marks a new 
era of prosperity also. The evidence of an imperial coinage is 
always perfunctory, and in the C.I. F. or Ὁ. R. 1. F. S.or Ὁ. 1. 
F. 5. (Colonia Julia Felix Sinope)* which now makes its ap- 
pearance on the city’s coins*® and in inscriptions on stone* the 
‘“‘Felix” is not necessarily descriptive, and indeed shows itself 
with almost monotonous continuity down to the time of Gallienus. 
Even the Aapmpordrn® on a sarcophagus is tainted with a kind of 
municipal cant. But, as a matter of fact, becoming a Roman 
colony included very tangible municipal privileges as well as a 
strong addition to the population. The new colonists were not 
distributed throughout the city but occupied a separate quarter 
by themselves,® while the remaining territory was occupied by 
the earlier inhabitants who had survived the fire and sword of the 
Mithradatic wars. 

The history of Sinope being thus merged in the world-em- | 
bracing history of Rome, its separate annals are largely lost to 
view. Almost the only mention of it at this time is found in 
Josephus who speaks of Marcus Agrippa’s warm greeting of 
Herod there and the departure of the two in 16 B.C. upon an 
expedition to the Cimmerian Bosporus.’ The same old natural 
sources of commercial prosperity continued. The fish still appears 
on the coins and the figure of Ceres and the plough.® Strabo?® 
writes of the beauty of the city and its surroundings in words 
to which we have referred in an earlier chapter. Roman mile- 


1Kckel, Doctr. Num. II, 391 f.; Marquardt, Rém. Staatsverwaltung I 357; 
Schoenemann, op. cit. p. 96; Head, Hist. Num. p. 435. 

20,1. A. S. or C. A. 58. (colonia Augusta Sinope) also occurs. It is not 
surprising to find Augustus’ name on the coins. He was regarded as a king 
in Paphlagonia, temples were built to him, and his cult established, cf. Revue 
d. Etudes Gr. 1901, pp. 26-45. 

3 Mionnet, Descr. de Médailles Antiques II goof.; IV 575 f.; Eckel, Doctr. 
Num. II 1, 389 f.; Rasche, Lex. Num. IV 2, 1105 f.; Cohen, Description 
historique des monnaies V, pp. 123, 174, 324, 474; Imhoof-Blumer, Klein- 
asiatische Miinzen, pp. 6-10, p. 231, pl. 1; Macdonald, Greek Coins in the 
Hunterian Collection II, p. 238; Brit. Mus. Cat.; Six, Num. Chron. 1885; 
Head, Hist. Num.; Schoenemann, op. cit. p. 96. 

*Cf. C. I. L. III 239, 6978. 

5 Cf. λαμπροτάτῃ κολωνείᾳ in Am, J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 314. 

6 Strabo XII 546, νυνὶ dé καὶ Ρωμαίων ἀποικίαν δέδεκται καὶ μέρος τῆς πόλεως 
καὶ τῆς χώρας ἐκείνων ἐστί.. 

Τ Josephus, Arch. XVI 21; Dio Cass. LIV 24. 

8 Cf. Mionnet, etc., as cited above ; Imhoof-Blumer, op. cit. p. 7,4; pl. 17. 

9 XII 545, 546. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 257 


stones were set up in the vicinity and a multitude of inscriptions,’ 
honoring Germanicus, Tiberius, Agrippina, Hadrian, Antoninus 
Pius, Marcus Aurelius and other lesser Romans testify, if the 
testimony were needed, how completely Sinope had become 
merged in Rome. 

And yet in a general way it seems permissible to indicate 
certain ascending stages by which the city’s prosperity and honor 
were increased. Whatever the general welfare of Sinope under 
the Roman Republic, it nevertheless had to suffer from the self- 
seeking ambitions of its governors, who regarded their provinces 
as prizes to be exploited in their own interests. A better day 
came under the more solid government of the Empire, for there 
was at least some sense of responsibility felt by the proconsuls 
to the authorities at Rome. In the time of Augustus, however, 
Bithynia and Pontus were not an imperial province but were 
under the Senate.* Her proconsuls were appointed for a year 
at a time. Their characters doubtless varied very greatly and 
continuous plans for the improvement of the city, stretching over 
a considerable period, were unlikely to be made. But under 
Trajan Bithynia and Pontus became an Imperial province and its 
governor was obliged to consult the Emperor even upon matters 
of detail and to be responsible to him for his administration, so 
that an Imperial province, at least under such an Emperor as 
Trajan, was better off than a senatorial one. In the younger 
Pliny Sinope had a governor of unusually excellent personal 
qualities. His construction of an aqueduct, by which a much 
needed supply of pure water was brought from a distance of 
sixteen miles in the interior, testifies to his care for the physical 
well-being of the inhabitants, while his thoughtful and discrimi- 
nating report in regard to the new superstition, Christianity, 
shows a similar consideration of mental and spiritual welfare.’ 


CHAPTER IX. 


THE CIVILIZATION OF SINOPE. 


“10 high Sinope’s distant realms 
Whence cynics rail’d at human pride”. 
Tennyson, Persia. 


The external history of ancient Sinope, as we have now studied 
it, interests us by its striking vicissitudes. But more important 
1Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 310, 327-329. 


2 Dio Cass. LIII 12; Strabo XVII 840; Suet. Aug. 47; Tac. Ann. I 74. 
5 Pliny, Ep. X 90,91. On the aqueduct cf. A. J. P. XXVII, p. 131. 


258 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


than battles, captures, recaptures, autonomies and successive sub- 
jections is the internal history of its people, the instruction their 
annals give in the development of the race in character and 
culture, government, occupation, literature, and art. 

Sinope’s position on the borderland between Orient and Oc- 
cident gave it a strange and cosmopolitan mixture of nationalities. 
The Assyrian element was in force down to the fourth century. 
The native Paphlagonian was there. The subtle and finished 
Greek, with his peculiar power of communicating his civilization, 
the wily and treacherous Persian, and the resolute Roman suc- 
cessively found their way to the chief Pontic sea-port and despite 
depopulations and municipal tragedies of all sorts, Sinopean 
civilization must, in its rude frontier fashion, have acquired 
something of that universal character which Rome had in its 
larger and more magnificent way, when in its hour of power the 
different elements of the world were poured into it. There must 
have been, at first successive and afterwards synchronous, many 
different costumes and complexions, many languages spoken, 
many cults observed, many conflicting ideas of honor and dis- 
honor and many individual acts both brave and base. 

What the characteristic spirit and temper of the people of this 
frontier sea-port were is a question of profound interest. What 
mental and intellectual qualities did Sinope’s able men nourish 
and develop? An answer seems obtainable and is what would 
naturally be expected. Life at the limit line of civilization is 
perpetually bringing forward sharp contrasts between the rude 
and the cultured, the cowardly and the brave, the blunt-minded 
and the keen. Constant hardship and privation teach such men 
to scorn delights and luxuries, to increase the catalogue of things 
they can go without and to write the articles of necessity in the 
fewest lines. The temper of mind becomes independent, brave, 
terse, and cynical. That this was the characteristic Sinopean 
spirit is evident from the quality of literary genius her men de- 
veloped after being transferred to the congenial soil of Athens. 
The Sinopean product there was the keen laconic contempt of 
Diogenes (412-323) and in the new comedy ludicrous scenes 
drawn from the realism of life and executed with a fine scorn 
extending in Diphilus even to the chronology which makes Hip- 
ponax and Archilochus suitors of Sappho.’ Not that Sinope 


1 Athen. XIII 599 d. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 259 


produced no historians or geographers,’ for our appendix of 
_ Sinopeans will show that she did; but scarcely a line from them 
has survived and chroniclers seldom mention their names, while 
the apophthegms of Diogenes and the jests of Dionysius and of 
the brothers Diodorus and Diphilus® are repeatedly found in 
quotations and fragments which have had too much life in them 
to be allowed to die; and when the authors themselves passed 
away their honored names were cut into Athenian gravestones. 
The tradition that Diogenes fled with his father to Athens because 
the latter had been detected in forging or adulterating coins, the 
entrance of the young man into the school of Antisthenes, indeed 
the whole career of this remarkable cynic are not to be cited in 
this connection.’ Nor need the multiplied jests which Athenaeus 
and Stobaeus quote be exploited; but the individual courage 
amounting to recklessness which made Diogenes ask Alexander 
to get from between him and the sun, the casting aside of the 
wooden bow! after he saw the lad drink from the hollow of his 
hand, the reduction of his living quarters to a fithos, together 
with the coarse fun of the comic poets, perpetually directed 
against the irksome embarrassments of the parasitic temper, 
which cannot live from its own resources but eats the bread of 
belittling dependence upon the wealthy, may serve to reflect that 
ready individual courage of man against man, that cheerful ac- 
ceptance of hardships in matters of food and shelter and especially 
that rough humor and biting scorn of everything soft and 
effeminate, which is continually putting itself in evidence all 
along the line of adventurous colonial life. The fully developed 
form of Sinope’s peculiar talent, the only talent of which she 
gives any great literary evidence, coming to flower when trans- 
planted to the favoring soil of Athens in such instances as 
that of Diogenes ;* of the brilliant slave Cynic, Menippus,° whose . 
skilful combination of prose and poetry led the Roman Varro 


ΤῈ g. Baton, Diophantus, and Theopompus. 

2 Cf. Prosopographia Sinopensis. 

3Cf. Diog. Laer. Vitae Phil. VI; cf. Zeitschrift fir Numismatik XXIII 
(1901), p. 138; and Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 50, for coins with AIO and 
“Ἱκεσίου on them; cf. also (.1.6. 7074. 

* What time these men went to Athens it is impossible to tell, but probably 
it was early in their career, because they seem to have imbibed the spirit of 
Athenian life so deeply. Their fragments show no explicit references to their 
native town. 

°Cf. Prosopographia Sinopensis. 


260 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


into imitation ;; of Hegesaeus the Cynic,’ and of the line of comic 
poets which I have indicated, clearly points back to its hardy 
beginnings in its indigenous Sinopean soil. 

The scenic character of Sinope must always have tended to 
induce in its people a spirit of boldness and freedom. The 
mountains lay behind them and their lofty promontory com: 
manded a far-reaching view of the sea, The combination of 
mountain and sea, together with their geographic isolation, must 
have helped them to that boldness and freedom of spirit and that 
individualism and enterprise for whose presence in the Greeks of 
the motherland so much credit is given to the similar features of 
her natural scenery. Such people have the travelling instinct and 
we are not surprised to find great numbers of them at Athens.’ 
A stronger testimony is the inscription of their names as πρόξενοι 
at Delphi,‘ at Histiaea in Euboea® and, more remarkably still, at 
the secluded interior town of Cleitor in Arcadia.° 

Material for constructing the history of the governmental devel- 
opment of Sinope is meagre, The tantalizing numismatic list of 
magistrates’ belonging to the autonomous period yields the 
names of no specific offices. The names of only two tyrants® are 
known and the mention of public assemblies is bare of details. 
From an inscription at Sinope (Am, J. Arch, IX (1905), p. 312, 
No. 40) we know that in the Macedonian epoch there were pry- 
tanies as at Athens. We have alist of fourteen πρυτάνεις of whom 
One is ἐπιστάτης τῆς βουλῆς and another γραμματεύς. Even in Roman 
times details of the method of the city’s government are lacking. 
The municipal functions of the priestly rovrapyns are hardly evident 
beyond the obligation to give public games at his own expense.® 
From Roman mile-stones we learn the name of Aur. Priscianus 
who was praeses pr(ovinciae) P(onti) and that praeses was used 


1 A good specimen of the Menippean satire is Seneca’s Apocolocyntosis of 
Claudius. Cf. Biicheler’s Petronius. 

2 Pupil of Diogenes, cf. Diog. L., VI 84. An inscription from Sinope makes 
_ even Perseus a Cynic, because he too carries a pouch and the ἅρπη, the equiva- 
lent of the Cynic’s βάκτρον, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 320-322, The harlot 
Sinope, who took her name from her native town, should also be cited, cf A. J. P. 
XXVII, p. 133. 

8 Cf. Prosopographia Sinopensis. *Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 330. 

5 Cf. Ibid., pp. 332, 333. 8 Cf. Ibid. p. 330. 

7Six, Num, Chron. 1885, p. 50. ὃ Timesilaus and Scydrothemis, 
» ΟΡ Am. J. Arch. l. c., pp. 311, 312; J. H. S., 1900, p. 154; Revue des 
Etudes Anc., rgor, p. 138. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 261 


in a technical sense before the time of Diocletian. The change 
to praesides was made by Probus or Carus, not by Severus or 
Aurelian, as has generally been supposed (cf. Mommsen, Rom. 
Staatsrecht, pp. 240, 263; Am. J. Arch. 1. c. pp. 328, 329; A. J. P. 
XXVIII, p. 139, ἢ. 2). But Sinope’s early constitutional history 
must go unwritten by moderns until the discovery of the ancient 
one which Aristotle composed. 

We know more about the occupations of the people. The 
fish, the plough, the ship, are on the city’s coins." The maker of 
amphoras and other pottery,’ the weaver of nets, the forger of 
steel implements of good repute,® the wood-cutters who felled the 
trees for the timber-exports,‘ the skilful Greek engineers and ship- 
builders,’ were all there. The slave was there, though only two 
are known by name,° the physician’ also and the priest and 
priestess,° the soldier, and the sailor, always in evidence at such 
asea-port. The lyre held by Apollo on coins’ reminds us of the 
presence of musicians. And for the hours of recreation there 
were athletic contests and, at least in Roman days, though no 
remains of any amphitheatre are to be found, bull-fights and 
hunting exhibitions.” 

The early settlement of Sinope by the Milesian Greeks guaran- 
teed its people a continuous course in physical culture. One of 
them took the prize for boxing in the contest dyeveious πυγμήν at 
the Amphiaraia at Oropus about 350 B. c." An Attic inscription 
gives us the list of victories won by the Sinopean Valerius 
Eclectus in 248 a. D.” Still another, Damostratus, won six 


1 For the fish cf. Head op. cit.; Six, Num. Chron., 1885 ; Brit. Mus. Cat.; for 
the plough cf. Imhoof-Blumer, op. cit. p. 7, no. 4, pl. 17; for the ship’s prow 
cf. A. J. P. XXVII, p. 135. 

2Cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. pp. 294-302. 8Cf, A.J. P. XXVII, p. 143. 

*Cf. A. J. P. XXVII, pp. 140, 141. 

5 Cf. p. 245 and Polyaen. VII 21, 2,5 who says the Sinopeans had a multitude 
ἀρχιτεκτόνων, τεχνιτῶν, τεκτόνων, ναυπηγῶν, 

δ Manes: cf. Aelian V..H. 13, 28; Diog. Laert. VI 55; Seneca, De Tranq, 
Animi VIII 5; Strabo VII 304; Strabo XII 553; Menippus: cf. Prosopogr. 
Sinopensis. Cf. also Plaut. Curc. 443. 

7Cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c.,.p. 315, no. 44. 

SCf. Ibid., p. 312, no. 39; p. 322, no. 63. 

®Six, Num. Chron. 1885, pl. 11 18, 19; J. H. S, IX. p. 300. 

10 Cf. Am. J. Arch. |. c., p. 311. 

Cf, Hestiaeus in Prosopogr. Sinopensis, also Am. J. Arch. l.c., Ρ. 330. 

Cf. Prosopogr. Sinopensis. 


262 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


wrestling contests at the Isthmian games.’ I may add that there 
is at Sinope itself at least one evidence of athletic glory. I found 
there an inscription of which only one word remains, but that 
word is παράδοξος, a victor in the πάλη and παγκράτιον" All these 
evidences point to a multitude of other successful Sinopean con- 
testants and to a still larger multitude of unsuccessful ones. This 
love of athletics would, of course, be self-evident in Roman times, 
even without Strabo’s mention of the gymnasium® and without 
the inscription which gives the name of its director, Claudius 
Potelius.* 

Ancient Greece had one great literary focus at which, unless 
hindered by some special civic enmity, as in Pindar’s case, all 
literary genius centred. The literary element in Sinope'’s civili- 
zation, therefore, must not be judged by the works published 
within her walls; for no such publications, unless possibly it be 
the editing of her edition of Homer,’ can be proved. . She must 
be judged rather by the product of her citizens after they had 
migrated tothe motherland. That product included the long list 
of Baton’s histories, the work on earthquakes by Theopompus, 
who is sometimes considered a geographer and sometimes an 
historian, and the writings of Diophantus, who was historian as 
well as general; it included the Cynic philosophies of Diogenes, 
Menippus and Hegesaeus, and the Epicurean of Timotheus of the 
first century B. C.; it included the comedies of Dionysius, Diphilus, 
and Diodorus, and the epigrams of Heracleides.® In the field of 
oratory, in fine, we must. not forget Xenophon’s critical estimate 
of Hecatonymus.as δεινὸς λέγειν On a previous page I have 
already indicated the field in which men of Sinopean origin said 
their best remembered words. But the list of names we have just 
recited shows that their general literary activity was not in- 
considerable. , 

Sinope cannot boast with certainty of any painter or sculptor. 
Doubtless she had paintings which, like those 0 the rest of the 
Greek world, have perished. In any case, her streets and squares 
and shrines were not devoid of statues. Those of her great 
Cynic® may possibly have been carved in Sinope itself, but the 


8 


1 Anth. Plan. 3, 25. 2 Am. J. Arch. |. c., p. 324. 
3Strabo XII 545. *Am, J. Arch, l.c., p. 311. 
5Cf, A. J. P. XXVII, p. 133. δ Cf. Prosopogr. Sinopensis. 


7Cf. Xen. Anab. V, 5, 7. 
8 Χρῃσστός is simply a λιθουργός of late date, cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c., p. 331. 
9 Diog. Laert. VI 78. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 263 


celebrated figure of Autolycus, which probably had its shrine, 
for he was consulted as an oracle, was the work of the Olynthian 
Sthennis in the fourth century.’ As to the sculptor of the storied 
statue of Serapis, which according to Tacitus and others was 
carried off to Egypt, we are not informed.’ And as to the precise 
nature of the “sphere” of the astronomer Billarus we are equally 
left in the dark.® In later years statues of the emperors would 
multiply and doubtless the cylindrical stone, now there, whose 
top is hollowed out into a mortar for grinding corn, and which 
bears an inscription to Marcus Aurelius‘ was the pedestal of a 
statue set up in his honor. No doubt many pieces of sculpture 
have been carried off to other lands. Thereis, for example, in the 
Museum at Constantinople an excellent sarcophagus from Sinope 
with sculptures of boys bearing grapes. Many of plainer type 
are still to be seen in Sinope. We have already had occasion’ to 
mention the archaic coins of the fifth century bearing a head with 
bulging eyes, high cheek-bones and typical smile, and on the 
reverse the simple incuse square, and we have noted the finer 
coins that were minted after Athenian influences had come with 
Pericles, after 444 B.c.° The relief of Hera with a nymph be- 
fore her mentioned in the Syllogos' I could not find; but I 
discovered a “ Funeral Banquet” relief of Roman date, which 
has not been published. The execution is not of high order but 
the design is worthy of mention because it is the only specimen, 
so far as I know, which depicts so many pieces of armor together. 
Usually there is only a shield ora helmet, but in this one there 
are helmet, shield, greaves, and spear represented as hanging on 
the wall. It is about 0.31 high by 0.35m. in width. Perhaps one 
should not omit the two lions of inferior Roman workmanship, 
one built into the wall, the other lying on the ground. These 
and the ‘‘ Funeral Banquet” relief just mentioned are the only 
objects of ancient art I noticed in Sinope, aside from a few terra- 
cotta figurines. The disfigured bust thought by the inhabitants 
to represent Autolycus has been carried off from its niche in the 
wall of the Byzantine tower.* Meagre as these materials are, they 


1Strabo XII 546; Appian, Mith. 83; Plut. Luc. 23; Lowy, Inschriften 
Griech. Bildhauer 103*, 481, 541; Sthennis of Olynthus is identical with 
Σθέννις Ἡροδώρου᾽ Αθηναῖος ; cf. also Overbeck, Antike Schriftquellen, 1343-1349. 


2Cf. Chap. X init. ὅ Strabo XII 546, 
*C. 1. L. III 239, 6978. 5Cf. A. J. P. XXVII, p. 151. 
8 Cf. ibid, p. 153. TSyllogos κζ΄ 1900, pp. 263-264. 


8Cf. Hommaire de Hell, op. cit., p. 346. 


264 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, 


enable us to think of Sinope as having some satisfactions, perhaps 
much more numerous than we can now conceive, for the constant 
human desire to fix the forms of men and living things in stone, 

Of the architecture of ancient Sinope, its art as carried into 
building, no more can be said than of its other art. Notwith- 
standing the care’ with which the city was built, the old structures 
have perished. The only possible trace I could find of the 
aqueduct is in the arches against which part of the city wall is 
built. The wall also contains, as before noted,’ pieces of archi- 
traves with inscriptions and columns. Twoof these inscriptions 
testify to a building, or at least parts of a building, having been 
erected at the expense of certain individuals.‘ We know that 
different men did sometimes put their means together to erect a 
structure, while at other times the whole building was finished at 
the expense of one person.’ Either supposition may have been 
the fact in regard to these fragments. Quarries still exist out on 
the promontory.’ The finest of Mithradates’ palaces was at 
Sinope’ but all its adornments, together with the stoas, gym- 
nasium, and market-place of later times, have disappeared and 
left no trace.® 


CHAPTER X. 


THE CULTS AT SINOPE. 


Many deities were worshipped at Sinope. The literary evi- 
dence, which consists of Strabo’s account of an oracle of Autolycus® 
and of what Tacitus, Plutarch, Macrobius and.Clement of Alex- 
andria say about Ptolemy’s securing the image of Serapis from 
Sinope, is scant.” But the inscriptions upon altars and upon other 
stones, together with the legends and figures on coins, afford a 
considerable bulk of testimony. By collating this we find at 
Sinope cults of seven gods out of the Great Twelve: Zeus, Apollo, 


1Strabo XII 545. °CE A. J, 2. SRV, p50, 
8 Cf, ibid. *Am, J. Arch, l. c., p. 306, no, 33; p. 307, no. 34. 
5Cf. ibid. p. 307. 6 Hamilton, op. cit., p. 312. 


7 Reinach-Gétz op. cit., p. 287; Diod. XIV 31; Cic, De Imp. Cn. Pomp. 
21(8). 

8Cf, A. J. P. XXVII, p. 130. ® Strabo XII 546, 

10 Tac. Hist. ΙΝ 83, 84; Plut. de Iside et Osir. c. 28, 362a (source Manetho) ; 
De Sollertia Animalium 36, 984; Eust. ad. Dionys. Per, 255; Steph. ΒΥΖ. 5. τ; 
Clem, Protrept. IV, 48 (26 ed. Sylburg); Macrob. Saturn.1 4; Cyrill. Jul. p. 13 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 265 


Athena, Hermes, Ares, Poseidon, and Demeter;' of five of the 
later importations: Dionysus, Asclepius, the Dioscuri, Serapis, 
and Isis;? of four mythical heroes: Autolycus, Phlogius, Perseus, 
and Heracles ;* of four astral divinities: Helios, Selene, Hydra- 
choos, and Sirius;* and of six of the abstract or generalized con- 
ceptions: Nemesis, Themis, Eros, Nike, Hygieia, and Fortuna.® 
I found there also an altar θεῷ μεγάλῳ ὑψίστῳ" Lanaras had pre- 
viously discovered one θεῷ ὑψίστῳ: There are no large altars. 
That such existed we may argue from the presence of the great 
statues of Autolycus and Serapis, but the iconoclasm of the 
Christian and of the Mohammedan has left no trace of them. 
Those to be seen at Sinope, numerous as they are, are small. 
The largest one stands in a field and is only ΟἹ cm. in height, 
including the rough portion of 17 cm. which was under ground.*® 
Two others about 50 cm. high have been carried into an apothe- 
cary Shop.’ Another, 58 cm. high, stands in a back yard," and 
another, 49 cm. high, supports the wooden post ofa porch.” All 
have the same general form, with projecting bases and tops, and 


1 Ζεὺς δικαιόσυνος μέγας, Am. J. Arch. 1X (1905), p. 302; Ζεὺς ἥλιος ναυδαμηνὸς 
ἐπήκοος, Ibid. p. 303; for a similar epithet ‘of Zeus, εὐρυδαμηνός, cf. Revue 
Arch, 1888, II, p. 223; Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition, no. 589; J. H. 5. XVIII, 
p. 96; Ramsay, Cl. Review, 1905, pp. 417, 419. The Sinope inscription does 
not favor Ramsay’s connection of the epithet with Men, the moon-god, The 
epithet is probably local. Hermes, Am. J. Arch. 1. c., p. 323; on Poseidon 
cf. below. All seven appear on coins, cf. works on coins as cited, p. 256, 
note 3, 

? Asclepius, Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 306; Serapis, Ibid. pp. 315, 331 ; Isis, 
Ibid. p. 312; for Dionysus, the Dioscuri, Serapis, and Isis cf. works on coins 
as cited, p, 256, note 3. 

8 Autolycus, Strabo XII 546; Appian, Mithr. 83; Phlogius, Am. J. Arch. IX 
(1905), p. 306 ; Perseus, Ibid. pp. 320-322. Heracles, Ibid. p. 305, alsoon coins, 
cf. Imhoof-Blumer, Monnaies Grecques p. 230, no. 13; Num.-Chron. 1885, pl. II, 
18; for Heracles and Perseus cf. also the works on coins cited. For Perseus at 
the neighboring town of Amisus cf. Cumont, Revue Archéologique V (1905), pp. 
180f. Perseus was the mythical ancestor of the Achaemenidae with whom 
Mithradates the Great, born at Sinope, claimed relationship. 

*Cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. Ρ. 323. For the head of Helios on coins of Sinope 
cf. Mionnet, op, cit. suppl. IV, p. 574, 131; British Museum Catalogue of 
Greek Coins, Pontus, pl. XXII,15. De Koehne, Description du musée de 
M. le prince Kotschoubey p. 59 thinks that the cult of Helios was introduced 
into Olbia from Sinope, Cf. Hirst, The Cults of Olbia, J. H. S. XXII, p- 43. 

> Hygieia, Am, J. Arch. 1. c., p. 306; Themis, Ibid. p. 323; for the others cf. 
works on coins as cited above. 

ὁ Ibid. p. 304. 7 Ibid. p. 306. 8 Ibid. p. 303. 

* Ibid. p. 306, nos. 28, 29. 10 Tbid. p. 305. 1 Thid. p. 304. 


266 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


inscriptions occupying the smooth space between. The inscrip- 
tions are upon one side only and have the same general wording, 
conveying the name of the dedicator, the god to whom set up, 
and a general votive expression. 

The statue and the shrine of Autolycus imply a temple where 
those who consulted the oracle of the city’s founder might meet.’ 
The two-columned portico in which Nemesis stands on many 
imperial coins is proof that a temple of that goddess existed at 
Sinope. Another temple appears from the expression of the 
woman Rheipane, who declared herself honored because she 
dwelt ‘“‘near pure Serapis”, i.e., near to his temple.’ If we 
receive the stories which relate the carrying off of Serapis to 
Alexandria their mention of a colossal statue and of the worship 
of the god at Sinope are another indication of the existence of his 
temple there. Other temples there doubtless were to other gods 
named in the lists already given, but these three are reasonably 
certain. 

The sea-girt peninsula would not long be without some worship 
of Poseidon.* Oncoins?® the figure of the god appears both seated 
and standing and in both cases with the familiar dolphin and 
trident, one in one hand, the otherin the other, The prominence 
of this cult at Sinope appears from a decree giving valuable per- 
quisites to the priest of Poseidon Heliconius.’ He is to be exempt 
from military duty. At public contests he is to have a wreath 
and wine. Incertain months he is to have the right leg, the loins, 
and the tongue of public sacrifices, and of private sacrifices the 
loins or shoulder-blade and breast. The worship of this god would 
naturally begin at an early date, and we find’ his image on many 
pre-imperial coins as well as upon those of the later emperors. 


1Cf. Strabo XII 546; Appian, Mithr. 83. 

2Cf. coins of Trajan, Caracalla, Maximinus, Gordianus, Philippus Junior, 
also Faustina, Tranquillinus in works cited, p. 256, note 3. 

3 Cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 315. The temple undoubtedly stood in the Greek 
Quarter where this inscription and Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 312, no. 40 were found, 
not at the narrowest part of the isthmus just outside the walls to the south- 
west, where a Byzantine church was excavated, as is stated in Parnassos 
VI 869. 

4 Cf. the name Poseidonius on vase-handles from Sinope, Am. J. Arch. l.-c. 
pp- 300, 301. Ποσειδεῶν occurs as the name of one of the months, cf. Dit- 
tenberger, Sylloge *, 603. 

5 Cf. Head, Hist. Num. p. 435 and other works on coinsas cited, p. 256, note 3. 

6 Cf. Dittenberger ].c. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 331, no. 87, also shows worship 


of Poseidon. 


‘ANCIENT SINOPE. 267 


The significance of Sinope’s worship of Apollo is somewhat 
_ obscure. He was regarded as the founder of Miletus,’ and 
Sinope was founded by the Milesians who naturally would pro- 
mote the worship of their home-god at the new settlement. The 
migration of the god from the west is further indicated in those 
forms of the story of the rape of Sinope which spoke of her as 
being brought from Boeotia by Apollo.?, The representations on 
coins are various. One is an archaic figure standing near a tripod, 
with laurel branch in one hand and an ointment vase in the other. 
Another represents him with laurel wreath, seated on the om- 
phalos, with lyre in hand.’ 

The most prominent Sinopean deity was Serapis. From the 
time of Hadrian on by far the most frequent figure on her coins 
was Serapis,‘ and if we go back to the fourth century B. Cc. the 
testimony of the great Cynic is decisive in the same direction. 
The Athenians declared Alexander to be Dionysus.’ ‘‘ Then call 
me Serapis”’ said Diogenes, implying of course that that was the 
important local god of his native city. 

The worship of the heavenly bodies was always prominent at 
Sinope. Its name was probably connected with Sin, the Assyrian 
moon-god and its early Assyrian settlers doubtless brought that 
worship with them.® There has heretofore been no known 
Sinopean inscription with Selene expressly mentioned nor even 
any representation of Selene on coins; but a new inscription con- 
tains the names of six deities, one of which is Selene.’ This is 
one more testimony to the persistence of the moon cult. It is 
worth noting that three of the other names, Helios, Hydrachoos, 
and Sirius, also belong to heavenly bodies, the remaining two 
being Themis and Hermes. 

The Sinopeans hearing of Serapis in Egypt, a combination of 
Osiris, the sun-god, and Apis,* identified him with their own native 
god, Zeus Helios, and the Egyptians in turn hearing of the 
Sinopean deity, Zeus Hades, who Reinach thinks was none other 


1 Curtius, Gr. Geschichte I 493- 2Cf. A. J. P. XXVII, pp. 147, 148. 

3 Cf. Head, Hist. Num. p. 435 and other works cited, p. 256, note 3. 

* Num. Zeit. XXI (1889), pp. 2f., 385 f. A table I made shows that Serapis 
is the most frequent figure on imperial coins. Nemesis is second, 

5 Diog. Laert. VI 63. δ Cf. chap. ΙΝ (A. J. P. XXVII, p. 144 f.) 

7Am, J. Arch. 1. c., p. 323. 

8 Wilcken, Sarapis und Osiris-Apis (Archiv III, p. 249 f.) objects to the 
derivation of Serapis from Osiris and Apis. But cf. Lehmanns, Sarapis contra 
Oserapis, Beitr. z. alt. Geschichte IV (1904), p. 396. 


268 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


than the hellenized national god of the Paphlagonians,’ identified 
him with their Serapis, giving him attributes not Egyptian. Some- 
thing like this, I think, is the explanation of the story that arose 
about Ptolemy Soter having the colossal statue of the god of 
Sinope brought to Alexandria.” In any case Helios and Serapis 
were practically identified even in Egypt, just as we know them 
to have been in Sinope.’ 

Along with the worship of Serapis naturally goes that of Isis, 
whose head occurs on coins. A priestess of Isis is known from 
an inscription found at Sinope.* 

The cult of the emperors, which in the provinces was so strong 
as a political and social unifying force, flourished in Paphlagonia, 
where we know there was, for example, a temple and cult of 
Augustus.’ A similar worship doubtless existed in Sinope. 
Perhaps the inscription to Marcus Aurelius found there indicates 
divine honors paid to him. The strongest evidence of emperor 
worship in Sinope is the head of Augustus or some other emperor 
on what we may call the divine side of coins, that is, the side 
where the figures of deities were usually placed, and the name 
of some other as yet undeified emperor on the other side. 

Finally came Christianity, which placed the cross *® upon tomb- 
stones and churches and for atime caused the pagan temples to 


1 Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit., p. 232; Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums II 2or. 
Otto, Priester und Tempel im hellenistischen Aegypten, p. 11 f. thinks Serapis 
is a chthonic deity native to Egypt and not originally an oriental god as 
believes Preuschen in his Ménchtum und Sarapiskult. So also Bouché- 
Leclercq, Revue de histoire des religions XLVI (1902), p. 1 f. On Serapis- 
cult at Alexandria cf. also Lafaye, Histoire des divinités d’Alexandrie p. 16 f.; 
Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie, p. 1576 f. (Von Miiller’s Handbuch der kl. 
Alt. V, 2, 2,3); Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 72; The Silver Age of the 
Greek World p. 4or. 

*Zoega, Nummi Aegyptii, p. 133, no. 309, thinks a coin of Hadrian repre- 
sents the Sinopean statue being taken on board ship. On the whole mooted 
question cf. Wilkinson, The Ancient Egyptians III, p. 95 f.; Plew, de Sara- 
pide (KG6nigsberg 1868), p. 20, who takes the name of the mountain near 
Memphis, Sinopion, to be a mere fiction to connect the Sinopean tradition with 
that of Memphis, and rightly I think, cf. also J. H. 5. VI (1885), p. 289 f.; 
Jahrbuch des arch. deut. Inst., 1897, Anzeiger, p. 169 ; 1898, pp. 154,166 f., 172f. 
Representations of Serapis in art always follow the Greek type probably 
created by Bryaxis, cf. Reinach, Le moulage des statues et le Sérapis de 
Bryaxis, Revue Arch. XX XIX (1902), p. 5 f. 

3C, 1. G., 4683 f.; Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 306, no. 30. 

4 Tbid., p. 312. δ Cf. p. 256, note 2. 

6Cf, Am, J. Arch. 1. c., Pp. 311, 322, 325, 326, 3209. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 269 


be all but deserted and nearly ruined the market for sacrificial 
animals. Many of the Christians, about whom Pliny the younger 
wrote in his famous letter’ to Trajan, must have lived in Sinope, 
for the “contagion of this superstition” “ seized upon the cities”’, 
of which Sinope was an important one. “The Christians were 
wont to meet together on a stated day, before it was light, and to 
sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as to God and 
bind themselves by an oath, not to the commission of any wicked- 
ness, but not to be guilty of theft or robbery or adultery, never to 
falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge committed to. them when 
called upon to return it”. A fuller discussion of the Christian 
worship of this district as referred to in Pliny’s letter belongs to 
the domain of Church History rather than to this paper. Yet 
any account of Sinopean cults would be incomplete without 
this much. 
PROSOPOGRAPHIA SINOPENSIS.” 


᾿Αγαθόδωρος, φροντιστής, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. IX, (1905), 
P. 322, no. 61. 

"Ay| edi das Βαβύττου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313. 

᾿Αθήναιος ᾿Αντιάνδρου Σινωπεύς grave-stone, I. 6. (Co Ay HE, 3; 
3339- 

᾿Αθηνίω[ν] Διονυσίο[υ] ροηίε}6] ἘΠΟΥΕ, stone, I. 6. (C. I. A. ) 
Ἢ, 3, 3340. 

AiBovrio| s | Ma{ £]iwo[s], grave-stone, Am. J. Arch.].c. p. 318, no. 53- 

Αἰμιλιανὸς ᾿Οφιλλίου Κουρίωνος, grave-stone, ibid. p. 318, no. 52. 

Αἰσχίνης, vase-fabricant, ibid. p. 301, no. 20. 

᾿Ακύλας. Cf. ibid. p. 324, no. 68 Φλ]αμιν[(}1ου ᾿Ακύλα. 

᾿Αμφίλοχος Εὐγί ενίδου], ibid. p. 320. 

᾿Α[ο]υεῖτος, φοράρις (forarius), dedicator to Helioserapis, ibid. p. 
306, no. 30. Cf. Cagnat, Inscriptiones Graecae ad Res Romanas 
Pertinentes III, 1, no. 93. 

᾿Απατούριος, vase-fabricant, ibid. p. 299, no. 11. 

"Annua |yros, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 15. 

᾿Απολλωνίδης Ποσ(ε)ιδωνίου, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 300, no. 12; p. 301, 
nos. 16, 17. 

᾿Απολλώνιος Μενάνδρου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone in Athens,cf. Robinson, 
Berl. Phil. Woch., 1904, no. 49, cols. 1566 ἢ 


1Plin. Ep. X 96. 

* This list includes all names noted in inscriptions from Sinope and those 
of Sinopeans found elsewhere. Father’s names are as a rule not listed 
separately. 


270 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY., 


"Apia Πρεῖμα. Cf. 5. ν. Ἕρμων. 

᾿Αρίστ[αρ]χ[ο]ς [᾿Αρ]ιστά[ρχ]ο[υ], πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1. ¢., p. 
313. 

’Apre |uidwpos, vase-maker, ibid. p. 301, no. 15. 

"A ᾿σκ[λ]7ηπιόδωρος ᾽Ολύμπου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 212. 

ἤλτταλος, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 302, no. 22. 

᾿Αφροδίσιος ᾿Αφροδισίου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 312. 

᾿Αφροδίσιος Εὐπόρου Σινωπεύς, ἔφηβος, I. G. (C. 1. A.) II, 467. Cf. 
also s. ν. Εὔπορος. 

Βάκχιος Μνήσιος, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 54. 

Βάτων Σινωπεύς, ῥήτωρ and historian; Strabo XII, 546; Athenaeus 
VI, 251 e; X, 436; XIV, 639 d; Plut., Agis 15; Susemihl, 
Gesch. der Gr. Lit. der Alexandrinerzeit I, 635 f.; Schwartz in 
Pauly-Wissowa, Encyclopadie 5. v. Baton; Miller, Frag. Hist. 
Gr. IV, pp. 347-350. Date, third cent. B. c. Cf. also s. v. 
Menippus. 

BiAAapos, astronomer, possibly a Sinopean. Cf. Strabo XII, 546. 

Βόηθος Λυσιμάχου Σινωπεύς, Frave-stone, | Pag, ON § nee ἃ A.) Il, 3, 334 

B |oickos Mova. ..., dedicator, Am. 1: Arch. l. c. p. 306, no. 32. 

Γάεις ᾿Απολλωνί δου] Σινωπε[ύς], grave-stone, I. 6. (6. I. A.) II, 
2, 2907. 

Γλαυκίας, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 301, no. 21. 

Γλῆρις Λεμβίου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313. 

Δαμόστρατος Σινωπεύς, athlete who won six times in the πάλη at 
the Isthmian games, epigram. Cf. Anth. Plan, III, 25. 

Δημήτριος Φίντιος, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 313. 

Δημήτριος Σινωπεύς, Cavalry soldier and land-owner in Egypt. 
Cf. Grenfell and Hunt, Amherst Papyri, part II, nos. XLII and. 
LV. Date, first half of second cent. B. Ὁ. 

Δημόστρατος ἸΤρομηθίωνος, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. ]. c. p. 313. 

Διογένης, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. Pp. 297, no. 6. 

At loyevns, φιλόσοφος, ibid. p. 308. 

Διογένης ὁ Σινωπεύς, the famous Cynic philosopher (414-323 B.C.); 
cf. Strabo XII, 546; Diog. L. Vita Diog.; epigram in Preger, 
Inscr. Gr. Metricae no. 166. Possibly a tragedian also; cf. 
Kirchner, Prosopographia Attica, no.. 3804 and Pauly-Wissowa, 
Encyclopadie 5. Diogenes. C. I. G. IV, 7074 Διογένης Ἱκεσίου 
Σινωπαῖος is probably a forgery. 

Διόδωρος Σινωπεύς = Διόδωρος Δίωνος Σημαχίδης in I. 6. (C. 1. A.) 
II, 3, 3343. Comic poet; cf. Athenaeus VI, 225 6, 229 Ὁ; Χ, 
431 c; Preuner, Ein Delphisches Weihgeschenk p. 72; Meineke, 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 271 


Hist. Crit. pp. 418-419; Frag. Com. Graec. III, pp. 543-546. 
Meineke and Kaibel in Pauly-Wissowa op. cit. and A. Miiller 
(Philologus LXIII, p. 354) classed him under the Middle Comedy, 
but Capps (Am, J. Arch. IV (1900) p. 83) has shown that he is a 
poet of the New Comedy. He took part in the comic contests at 
Delos in the years 284 and 280 B. c. (B. C. H. VII, pp. 105, 107. 
The dates given are those of Homolle, Archives de |’Intendance 
sacrée pp. 58, 127, which are two years later than in the B. C. H.). 
Diodorus was also second and third at the Lenaea in Athens in 
288 with the plays Nexpés and Μαινόμενος. Diodorus was granted 
Athenian citizenship and is called an Athenian in Auctor Lex. 
Hermann, p. 324. His deme is given in I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3343 
on the family tomb-stone on which the name of Diphilus also 
occurs. For the inscription, which Wilhelm has rediscovered, cf. 
Wilhelm, Urkunden Dramatischer Auffiihrungen in Athen (Son- 
derschriften des Oest. Arch. Inst. in Wien, Band VI), p. 60. The 
identification of Diodorus and Diphilus as comic poets is due 
to Kumanudes, but he thought that Diodorus, father of Dion, 
was the comic poet. Capps (]. c.) with theaid of I. 6. (6. I. A.) 
II, 972 proves that the comic poet was the son of Dion and 
flourished about 300 B. c. Kirchner, op. cit. 3959, thinks the 
Διόδωρος ᾿Αθηναῖος Of B. C. H. VII, p. 105 is not a different poet, 
wrongly citing Capps. This Diodorus must be different from the 
Διόδωρος Σινωπεύς, whose name follows that of Διόδωρος ᾿Αθηναῖος 
among the κωμωιδοί. The ethnicon Σινωπεύς is used in the Delian 
inscriptions (B. C. H. VII, pp. 105, 107) because Diodorus of 
Sinope did not receive Athenian citizenship till after 282 B. Cc. or 
because he preferred to be known in Delos as a Sinopean to dis- 
tinguish him from an Athenian of the same name who was 
performing at the same time in Delos. There is no reason for — 
Wilhelm’s suggestion (op. cit., p. 61) that Διόδωρος ᾿Αθηναῖος was 
also from Sinope and Διόδωρος Σινωπεύς was his nephew, son of 
Diphilus. A comic actor by the name of Diodorus occurs also 
in B. Ὁ. H. IX, p. 134. Diodorus should not be read in G. Ὁ. I. 
2565, 1. 42 as restored by Kirchner Pros. 3934, cf. Wilhelm, op. 
cit. p. 245. 

Διονύσιος ᾿Απολλωνίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, 1. 6. (C. I. A.) IT, 
3; 3342. 

Διονύσιος Σινωπεύς, poet of the New Comedy; cf. Pauly-Wissowa 
s. Dionysius (105); cf. Meineke, Hist. Crit. I, p. 419; Frag. Com. 
Graec. III, 546-555; Athenaeus XI, 467 d, 497 c; XIV, 615. 


—TBRART 
OF THE 
UNIVERSITY 


OF 


272 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


In the last passage Athenaeus quotes the play of Dionysius 
called Ὁμώνυμοι; cf. also ΙΧ, 381 c. This led astray both Senge- 
busch, op. cit. p. 13 and Streuber, op. cit. p. 90, who say there 
was a grammarian Dionysius from Sinope who wrote περὶ Ὁμωνύ- 
pov. In 1. 6. (C. I. A.) II, 977 m, 1. 2 the name Dionysius 
should be read, cf. Wilhelm, op. cit. pp. 128 f., 135, 180. 

Διονύσιος Σινωπεύς, grave-stone in Rhodes, I. G. (I. G. Ins.) XII, 
I, 465. 

Διονύσιος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. |. c. p. 301, no. 18. 

Διονύσιος ᾿Αρχίππου, ἐπιστάτης τῆς βουλῆς and πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313. 

Διονύσιος Προκλέους Σινωπεύς, Kumanudes, ᾿Αττικῆς ᾿Επιγραφαὶ Ἔπι- 
τύμβιοι NO. 2296; Ἐφ. ᾽Αρχ. 1852-1855, p. 921, no. 1505. This 
inscription is omitted in the Corpus. For Πρόκλος cf. infra. 

Διόφαντος ᾿Ασκλαπιοδώρου Σινωπεύς, general of Mithradates the 
Great, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 331, no. 85. Perhaps to be identified 
with the author of the Ἱστορίαι Movrixai (cf. Miller, Frag. Hist. Gr. IV, 
p. 396). Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa Encycl. s. v. Diophantus 
gives the third cent. B. c. as the date of the historian Diophantus, 
but I see no reason for placing him so early. Agatharchides 
who quotes him belongs to the end of the second cent. B. Ὁ. 
(cf. Niese, Gesch. der Gr. und Mak, Staaten I, p.12). Diophantus’ 
victory over the Scythians was about 110 B. Cc. and he may have 
written the Ποντικά before then. A man who knew all about the 
Pontus would be just the one to send on such an expedition: 
Niese, Rhein. Mus. XLII, p. 569 makes the identification. 

Διόφαντος Ἐὐλαμπίχου, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 313. 

Δίφιλος Δίωνος Σινωπεύς, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3343, poet of the 
New Comedy, brother of the comic poet Diodorus, cf. supra; 
cf. Meineke, Hist. Crit. I, 446 f., Frag. Com. Graec. IV, 375-430; 
Strabo XII, 546; Anonym. de Com. XXX, XXXI; Susemihl, 
Gesch. der Gr. Lit. in der Alexandrinerzeit I, 260 f. Floruit 
about 320, cf. I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 977 g and Capps, Am. J. Arch. 
IV (1900) p. 83, note. Cf. Pauly-Wissowa op. cit. 5. Diphilus 
and Wilhelm, op. cit. pp. 123, 132. 

Δίων Διοδώρου Σινωπεύς, 1. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3343, father of 
Diphilus and Diodorus. 

Δῶρος Διοσκουρίδου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) III, 2, 
2908. 

Aépos, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 295, no. 1. 

3 |ééros "Eyvarios ’Eyvariov ὁ vids, ibid. p. 318, no. 51. 

Εἰδᾶς, vase-maker, ibid. p. 301, no. 16. 


- ANCIENT SINOPE. 273 


Ἑκατώνυμος, δεινὸς λέγειν, Sinopean ambassador to Xenophon’s 
Ten Thousand at Cotyora, Xen. Anab. V, 5,7; Six, Num. Chron. 
- 1885, p. 23. ems 

Οὐαλέριος ΓἜκλεκτος Σινωπεύς; βουλευτής and athlete, I. G. (C. I. A.) 
III, 1, 129. 08 | 

ἜἜνδημος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. l. c. p. 298, no. 8. 

᾿Ἐπίδημος ’Ex[:]e[A ]z[ov], νομοφύλαξ, Am. J Arch. l. c. p. 313. 

Ἐπίελπος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. |. c. Ρ. 295, no. 3. 

᾿Επιχάρης Θεαρίωνος, Sinopean ambassador, made πρόξενος of Histi- 
aea, ibid. p. 333, no. 96. 3 

L. E[r]en[n]ius Pompeianus, sarcophagus ibid. p. 326, no. 72. 

‘Epuaios Σινωπεύς. See Φαίδριον below. 

Ἕρμων. Inscription’ found near Sinope, letters 0.03 m. high. 

‘Eortaios Σινωπεύς, athlete who won in the dyeveious πυγμήν at the 
Amphiaraia at Oropus, I. G. VII (C. I. 6. S., ἢ 414. 

Εὐκλῆς, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 299, no. 10; p. 300, 
no. 12; p. 301, nos. 14, 17. 

Εὐλάλιος, epigram, ibid. p. 311. 

E’vous Bidrov Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. 6. (C. I. A.) III, 2, 2909. 

Εὐξένη Σινω[πίς], grave-stone, I. G. II, pars V (Ὁ. I. A. IV, 2), 
3343 Ὁ. 

Εὔπ[ορος], sarcophagus, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 314, no. 41. 

I. Κάιος Ed [τυχια]νὸς, ναύκλαρος, πρόξενος, Latyschev, Inscr. Ant. 
Orae Sept. Ponti Eux. IV, no. 72. 

Zén, wife of M. Haterius Maximus, sarcophagus, Am. J. Arch. 
lic. p. 315, no. 44. 7 

Ἡγησαῖος Σινωπεὺς ὁ Κλοιὸς ἐπίκλην, Cynic philosopher, pupil of 
Diogenes; cf. Diog. L. VI, 84. The name Hegesaeus occurs also 
as that of a δοῦλος τοῦ θεοῦ in a Greek inscription of the year 1781 
A. D., still to be seen over the gate-way of Sinope and published 
by Hommaire de Hell, op. cit.. I], pp. 351, 352; IV, pl. XII, 4. 

Ἡγησίθεμις “HpuxdreiSew Σινωπέος, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 


3» 3344. 
Ἡδίύλη, member of the family of Dion, Diodorus, and Diphilus, 


grave-stone; cf. I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3343. . 
᾿ριελοίδηε, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 295, no. 2. 


1 €€ PM@NOCX 
APIATTPEIMAE 
~ CIOY - AM®.. 


vali Ἕρμωνος x[enoté χαῖρε.) ἡ σύμβιος αὐτοῦ] ’ Apia. -«Πρεῖμα fa i ἀνδρὶ] 
ἀπε νας . σίου ᾿Αμφ[ιπολείτῃ. 


274 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


Ἡρακλείδης Mi xp |iov, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 13. 

Ἡρακλείδης Σινωπεύς, writer of epigrams; cf. Anth. Pal. VII, 281, 
392, 465. 

Ἡφαίστιος ᾿Εξηκέστου, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 313. 

Θεμιστῆς Noud| wlvos, grave-stone, ibid. p. 322, no. 60. 

Θέογνις Σινωπεύς, ibid. p. 332, NO. 93, epigram attributed to Simon- 
ides. 

Θεόπομπος Σινωπεύς, Wrote περὶ Σεισμῶν; cf. Phlegon of Tralles in 
Miiller, Frag. Hist. Graec. III, p. 622, 48. 

Θεύδωρος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. ]. c. p. 295, no. 3. 

Θρασωνίδης, rhapsode, cf. p. 279. 

Ἱκεσίας ᾿Αντιπάτρου, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 298, no. 9; p. 299, no. IO. 

‘Ikeaias, father of Diogenes the Cynic, Diog. L. VI, 20. 

ἸΙουκοῦνδος, dedicator of altar to Heracles, Am. J. Arch. l. c. 
Pp. 305, no. 27. 

Ἱστιαῖος, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 294, no. 1. 

Λικιννία Καισελλία, grave-stone, ibid. p. 317, no. 50. 

[Καλλικράτης] Μήτριος, Σινωπεύς, πρόξενος Of Delphi ibid. p. 330. 

Γάϊος Μάρκιος Κηνσωρῖνος, πρεσβευτὴς Καίσαρος, κηδεμὼν τῆς πόλεως, 
ibid. pp. 309, 310. 

Kirros Διονυσίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. Ὁ. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3345. 
Rangabé, Antiquités Helléniques II, p. 903, no, 1867 reads Sirros. 

Κλεαίνετος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. l. c. p. 302, no. 23. 

Κλεοχάρης, pirate and prefect of Sinope; cf. p. 253. 

Κορνουτίων Σινωπεύς, Child who died abroad (Rome), θρεπτός of 
Diodorus, Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca 702; I. G. (I. G. S., I.) 
XIV, 1787; Cagnat, Inscr. Gr. ad Res Rom. Pert. I, 293. 

Κτήσων, vase-maker, Am. }. Arch. 1]. c. p. 299, no. 9. 

Λάμαχος Χορηγίωνος, γραμματεὺς τῆς βουλῆς, ibid. p. 313. Also 
πρύτανις. 

Λάμαχος ᾿Αντίφου, grave-stone, ibid. p. 319, no. 54. 

Δεόνιππος, pirate and prefect of Sinope, cf. p. 253. 

Λε]ωμέδων ᾿Αριστώναί κτος, dedicator to Phlogius, ibid. p. 306, 
no. 31. 

Λέων Σινωπεύς, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3346. Grave-stele with 
relief of lion. 

Κ. Λικίννιος Φροῦγις, προξενητής, sarcophagus, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. 
Ρ. 315, no. 45. 

Λικίνιος Χρυσόγονος ’OAv....., ibid. p. 306, no. 33. 

L. Licinnius Fr(u)gi, an enormous grave-stone, ibid. p. 327, 
no. 73. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 275 


Ποπίλλιος Λουτατιανὸς vids Ποπί(ιλλίου) Οὐφικιανοῦ δὶς ἀρχιερέως καὶ 
_ Σηστίας Μαρκιανῆς ἱερείας μεγάλης ᾿Αθηνᾶς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) 
III, 2, 1450. - 

Olcinius Macrinus, C. I. L. ΠΠ|14402.Ὁ 

Mans Σαροάνδου, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. ]. c. p. 316, no. 49. 

Σεουῆρος Maxep, dedicator to Zeus Hypsistos, ibid. p. 306, no. 29. 

M. 1... aréptos Μάξιμος, physician, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 315, 
no. 44. 

Μεγαλήμερος, χαλκεύς, ibid. p. 322, no. 62. 

Μένιππος Σινωπεύς, Cynic philosopher, cf. Diog. L. VI, 95. Inall 
the handbooks Menippus, from whom the Menippean satires took 
their name, is spoken of as coming from Gadara in Syria. Strabo 
XVI, 759, followed by Steph. Byz. 5. v. Gadara, is the only 
authority for this; and Diogenes Laertius’ statement in VI, 99, 
that Menippus was in origin a Phoenician, is interpreted to mean 
that he came from Gadara, for Gadara was in Coele-Syria, a part 
of Phoenicia. But Diog. Laert. VI, 95 mentions a Menippus 
from Sinope who became ἐπιφανής among the pupils of Metrocles. 
Diog. L. then gives the life of Hipparchia, which is followed (VI, 
99) by the life of Menippus. The probability is that this Menippus 
is the same as the one in VI, 95, especially since the Sinopean is 
not included among the Menippi in sec. 101. Diog. L. makes 
the blunder of calling him a contemporary of Meleager whose 
date is the first half of the first century B. c, The fact that 
Meleager of Gadara wrote Menippean Satires is probably ac- 
countable for Diogenes’ statement and led Strabo to say that both 
came from Gadara. Menippus probably lived in the third century 
B. C., cf. Probus ad. Verg. Ecl. VI, 31, Varro qui sit Menippeus 
non a magistro cuius aetas /onge praecesserat. This is certainly 
true if we identify the Menippus of Diog. L. VI, 99, who wrote 
nothing σπουδαῖον and is undoubtedly the Cynic whom Varro 
imitated in his Satirae Menippeae or Cynicae, with the Cynic 
from Sinope who was a pupil of Metrocles (floruit about 270 
B. 6.). Zeller, Phil. der Griechen II, 1, p. 286, n. 3 identifies the 
two. Itis possible to go further. Diocles, who had made a special 
study of the lives of the philosophers and, therefore, ought to be 
followed in preference to Strabo, says (apud. Diog. L. VI, 99) 
that Baton from the Pontus was the master of Menippus. This 
may be the Sinopean ῥήτωρ and historian, whose date falls also in 
the third century (cf. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa, s, v. Baton and 
Susemihl, op. cit. I, 635 f.). That Menippus was a slave, as 


276 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


Diogenes says, we know also from A. Gellius IJ, 18, 7 and Ma- 
crobius I, 11, 42. Of course it is possible that Menippus was 
born in Gadara and went to Sinope where he lived with his master 
Baton (so Susemihl, op. cit. I, p: 44 f. who gives the literature on 
Menippus) but Sinope had enough slaves of its own without im- 
porting: any. ‘Menippus is an example of the characteristic 
Sinopean temper referred to above in c. IX. 

Mevickos Μήνιδος Σινωπεύς, 1. G. II, pars V (C. I. A. IV, eS 3546. 

Μένων Σινωπεύς, I. G. (Ὁ. 1. A.) II, 3, 3348. 
Μηνόδωρος ᾿Απολλωνίου Σινωπεύς; Comptes Rendus 1877, p. 277, 
Roman inscription found at Kertch. 

Μηνοφίλα Mdov Σινώπισσα, I. G. (C. I. A.) III, 2, 2910. 

Μῆτρις [K ]αλλικράτους; πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1, Ὁ p. — 3/3 ds 

Μῆτρις Νικάνδρου Σινωπεύς, Athen. Mith. XIII (1888), p. 429. On 
name Μῆτρις cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 330, no. 82. 

Mnrt[p |é[ Bu ]os (?) Δεινίου, Sinopean ambassador, πρόξενος of Histi- 
aea, Am. J. Arch. l. c. p. 333. 
᾿ MiOpaddrns Σινωπεύς, the Great, cf. Strabo XII, 545 and p. 252, 
ἢ. I supra. 

Μιθραδάτης, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 298, no. 7. 

Navva Διονύσοιο, ibid. p. 319, no. 55. 

Ναύπων Καλλισθένους, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 302, no. 23. 

Δούκιος Φιδικλάνιος Νέπως Σινωπεύς, lived to be more than a hundred 
years old, cf. Phlegon, Macrobioi (Miller, Frag. Hist. Graec. III, 


p- 609, 1). 
Νικίας Φι[λέου ἢ] Σινωπεύς, I. G. (C. 1. A.) II, 3, 3348. 
Niko. eee Πλουτά[ρχου] Σιν ]π| εὐς], I. 6. (C. 1. A.) III, 2, 2911. 


’Ornotpos ᾿Ονησίππου Σινωπεύς, 1..G. (Ὁ. I. A.) III, 2, 2912. 

᾽ονησίχα Μέν[ |vos ΣινωΪ πέω ]ς [γυνή], I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 2249. 

Παάμφιλος Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3350. 
Published in the Rhein. Mus. 1866, p. 513, no. 308 among the un- 
edited inscriptions. The inscription, Πάμφιλος Σινωπεύς, published 
in the Bolletino dell’ Instituto 1864, 48 has been overlooked. 
This is probably the same inscription and the Ha has become 
obliterated since the first publication. 

Πασιχάρης Δημητρίου, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 295, no. 2. 
᾿ K[Aavdia] Παῦλα, priestess of Isis, ibid. p. 312, no. 39. Cf. Cagnat, 
op. cit. III, 1, no. 95. 

᾿᾽οφίλλιος Πολύκαρπος, dedicator to Asclepius and Hygieia, Am. 
J. Arch. 1. c. Ρ. 306, no: 28. Cf. Αἰμιλιανός supra. 

Αἴλιος Θρεπτίων Ποντιανός, dedicator to θεὸς ὕψιστος, ibid. p. 306, 
no. 29. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 277 


Ποντικὸς [Θ]άλλου, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 314, no. 42. 

C. Aelfius?] Pontius, ibid. p. 327, no. 74. 

Π]οσειδώνιος Μει[ δίου], πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 313. 

Ποσιδεῖος [© leaf pi |avos, doruvépos, ibid. p. 301, no. 19. 

Κλαύδιος Toré[ Atos], γυμνασίαρχος, ἄρχων τοῦ πρεσβυτικοῦ, ποντάρχης, 
etc., ibid. p. 312, no. 39. Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. III, 1, no. 95. 

Apia Πρεῖμα. Cis. ¥. Ἕρμων. 

AUR(ELIUS) PRISCIANUS, pr(aeses) pr(ovinciae) P(onti) d(evo- 
tus) n(umini) m(ajestati) q(ue) eorum, A. J. P. X XVII, p. 139, 
n. 2; p. 260 f. 

_ Πρόκλος Σινωπεύς, renders thanks to Nymphs and Poseidon for 
being cured, Am. J. Arch. p. 331, no. 87. 

. Πρωταγόρας ᾿Αντισθένους Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 
3, 3351. 

Πρωταγόρας ἀδιρεο; ἀστυνόμος, Am. BP Arch, 1]. ς. p- 299, no. IT; 
Ρ. 301, no. 14. 

Πύθης Διονυσίου, dedicator to Ζεὺς δικαιόσυνος μέγας, ibid. p. 302, 
no. 24. 

Πυθοκλῆς ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 21. 

Πυρρίας Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (6. I. A.) II, 3, 3352. 

Ῥειπάνη, γείτων καθαροῖο Σαράπιδος, daughter of a pious and virtuous 
father, ibid. p. 315, no. 48. Cagnat, op. cit. III, 1, no. 96 wrongly 
reads Τειτιανή. 

‘Povgeiva, joint-dedicator with her husband of an altar to θεὸς 
μέγας ὕψιστος, ibid. p. 304. 

Σαιονείνιος, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 314, no. 43. 

SALVIUS, vir n(obilis) m(emoriae), unpublished grave-stone in 
church at Ortoi, one hour from Sinope.* 

Σέλευκος, pirate and prefect of Sinope; cf. p. 253. 

Σ]έλλιος, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 324, no. 68. 

Τιβ. KA. Σεουῆρος, Σινωπεύς, cured at Epidaurus, dedicator to 
᾿Απόλλων Madedras and Σωτὴρ ᾿Ασκλάπιος, I. G. IV (C. 1. P., 1), 956. 

Λούκιος Σεΐ πτίκιος ᾿Απόλαυστος, dedicator of altar to Ζεὺς Ἥλιος 
ναυΐ δα Ἰμηνὸς ἐπήκοος, ibid. p. 303. 

Σεραπίων Ἡφαιστίωνος Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, hy 4a2 CoE By ) III, 
2, 3633. 


1 Large marble slab with gable at the top, 1.16 m. high, 0.74 m. wide, 0.12 τῇ. 
thick. Letters vary from 0.08 m. to 0.10 τὴ. in height. 
VISEHNIALI 
IINGIONII 
SALVIVS VIRNM 
SIT 


278 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 


Σινώπη, wife of Midias; cf. 1. G. III, 3349 and Bechtel, Die 
Griechischen Frauennamen, p. 60. Cf. also Sinopis, daughter 
of Dionysius, wife of Diophantus in Ὁ. I. G., IV, 6991. 

Σινώπη, a harlot named after her native town, who lived in the 
first half of the fourth cent. B.c. Cf. A. J. P. XXVII, p. 133. 
Add to references there Schol. Dem. XXIV, 762, 4 and Leutsch- 
Schneidewin, Paroemiographi Graeci I, p. 451 (σινωπίσαι ἐπὶ τοῦ 
ἀσχημονῆσαι ἀπὸ ἑταίρας τινὸς ἐκ Σινώπης). 

Σκυδρόθεμις, tyrant and king of Sinope, Tac. Hist. IV, 83. 

Σοφοκλῆς Δημητρίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. II, 3, 3353. 

Σοφοκλῆς Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. XII (Inscr. Gr. Ins.), 1, 
466 (Rhodes). 

Σπόρος Σινωπεύς. See Swrnpis below. 

Στρατοκλῆς Διονύσοιο, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 55. 

Σύρι[ο]ς, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 315, no. 46. 

Spodpias Πυθαγγέλου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 
3354- 

Σωτηρὶς Σπόρου Σινωπέως, θυγάτηρ Νικομήδου ᾿Αντιοχέως γυνή, I. G, 
{ΠῚ Δ, ease: 

Τεύθρας Θυμοχάρους, κεραμεύς, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 296, no. 4. 

Τιβ. ”Apaxros, ibid. p. 324, no. 67. 

Τιμησίλεως, tyrant; cf. A. J. Ρ. XXVII, pp. 151-2. 

Τιμόθεος Σινωπεύς, Epicurean philosopher, Strabo XII, 546. 

Τίμων Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I, G. (C. 1. A.) II, 3) 3356. 

Τι]μώριος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p, 298, no. 8. 

Φαίδριον ‘Eppaiov Σινωπέως θυγάτηρ, grave-stone, I. 6. (6. I. A.) III, 
2, 2913. 

Φαρνάκης Φαρνάκου Σινωπεύς, died abroad, epigram, Kaibel, op. cit. 
252. 7 
Φειλητίων Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) III, 2, 2914. 
Φήμιος ᾿Αντίφου, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. |. c. p. 319, no. 54. 
* Φιλή[ σιος, grave-stone, ibid. p. 319, no. 54. 

Φιλοκράτης, vase-maker, ibid. p. 302, no. 22. 

Φίλων Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3357. 

Φίλων Διονυσίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3358. 

Φορμίων Συνήμονος, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 54. 

Μάνιος Φούλβιος Πακᾶτος, grave-stone, same family as Ackwvia . 
Καισελλία and the following name, ibid. p. 317. 

Φούλβιος Πραιτωρεῖνος, vids of the preceding man, ibid. 

Φρύνη Σινωπίς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3359. 


ANCIENT SINOPE. 279 


Xaipis ᾿Αφεναῖος Φάλερες = ᾿Αθηναῖος Φαληρεύς perhaps, Am. J. 
Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 56. 
ο΄ Χαρμοσύνα Σινωπίς, grave-stone, I. G. XII (Inscr. Gr. Ins.), 1, 
467. 
Xopnyiov Λεωμέδοντος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. |. c. p. 298, no. 7. 
Cf. also s. v. Λάμαχος and Λεωμέδων supra. 
Χρησστὸς Σινωπεύς, λιθουργός, ibid. p. 331, no. 87." 


Incomplete names are here added. 


. + adX\os, vase-maker (?), ibid, p. 297. 

..+ avira[s], Christian tombstone, ibid. p. 322, no. 59. 

. #...+.a(?) Μάρκου, ibid. p. 324, no. 68 and no. 66. 

| | ermos Δαμε ..... Σινωπεύς, πρόξενος of Cleitor, Athen. Mitt. 
VI (1881), p. 303 and Beilage 2. 
gees. v Θρασωνίδου Σινωπεύς, ῥαψωιδός ; cf. Collitz, Gr. Dialekt- 
Inschriften II, p. 742, no. 2564, |. 11. 

..++ \os, dedicator with his wife Ῥουφεῖνα to θεὸς μέγας ὕψιστος, 
_Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 304. 

.... 0s Καλλισθένο[υς], πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313. Cf. Ναύπων Καλλι- 
σθένους supra. 

. «os Πολυδώ[ρου], Σινωπεύς, dedicator to Serapis, ibid. p. 331, 
no. 84. 

. ++. Φιλίππου, Σινωπεύς, πρόξενος Of Cleitor, Athen. Mitt. VI 

(1881), p. 303 and Beilage 2. 


Jouns Hopxins UNIVERSITY. Davip M. ROBINSON. 


1Since this article was paged, I have received copies of three more unpub- 
lished inscriptions on grave-stones found last August on the isthmus of 
Sinope. These I hope to publish in the near future. They marked the 
graves of Ἰούλιος Kadreckdc(?), ναύκληρος ; of Μάνης, the name also of Diogenes’ 
slave (cf. p. 261, n. 6); and of Νάρκισσος. 


ΑΝ Wc τον ἃ 
ΙΝ eae oe 


American School 
of Classical Studies 
at Athens | 


GREEK AND LATIN INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE- 
AND ENVIRONS}? 


THE inscriptions the numbers of which are given in heavy- 
faced type (Nos. 1-12, 24-27, 35, 36, 49, 50, 59, 64-79) I 
discovered in Sinope and its environs during my stay there 
in June, 1903, and publish here from squeezes and copies. 
The others have already been edited but are added, with 
corrections, for the sake of completeness. 


VASE-HANDLES 


In the apothecary shop of Mr. Hadji-Anestis in Sinope 
there are several handles of amphoras stamped with inscrip- 
tions, all found in the same place in Boz-tepé near the Greek 
quarter. Nos. 13-23 come from the same spot, which seems 
to have been a dumping place for ancient amphoras. Exca- 
vations here would prove fruitful. 


1. An oblong stamp: length, 0.043 m.; width, 0.015 m. 
Letters, 0.003 m. in height. To the right a dolphin in the 
claws of an eagle, the symbol which occurs on coins of Sinope 
(cf. Brit. Mus. Cat. of Coins, Pontus, etc. pl. xxi, 15, 16, 17; 
pl. xxii, 1-7; Head, Historia Numorum, pp. 434 f.). 


I= TIAI Ἱστιαίου 
AZTY ἀστυ[νόμου 
ΔΩΡΟ Δώρο[υ ors 


1] desire to express my thanks to His Excellency Hamdy Bey, Director of 
the Imperial Museum in Constantinople, and to Dr. Wiegand, who assisted me 
greatly in my visit to Sinope. Mr. Myrodes of Sinope also did me great practical 
service, and I am under obligations to Dr. Wilhelm and especially to Professor 
Capps for various suggestions. 


American Journal of Archaeology, Second Series. Journal of the 9294 
Archaeological Institute of America, Vol. [X (1905), No. 8. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 295 


The same inscription with the same symbol is found on an 
-amphora-handle from Kertch (cf. Becker, V. Jahr. 7. kl. Phil. 
Suppl. X, p. 34, no. 12)> The name Histiaeus as astynomus 
occurs on other vase-handles from Kertch, some with the same 
symbol (cf. Becker, V. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 502, nos. 
28, 29; wid. Suppl. X, p. 28, nos. 15a, 156 and p. 34, no. 
11). The name Dorus as that of a Sinopean occurs in 


14. (C.1.A.) I, 2, 2908. 


2. An oblong stamp: length, 0.06m.; width, 0.02 m. Let- 
ters, 0.005 m. in height. 


[ἀστυνόμου] 
MASZIXAPSY Πασιχάρου 
ἘΞ ΥΝΗΜΕΗΤΡΟΡΊ τοῦ Δημητρί[ ou 
PAKAE H& Ἡρακλεῖ (8) ns 


The name Pasichares, genitive sometimes [lacvyapous, some- 
times Ilacvyapov, occurs as that of astynomus on vase-handles 
from Kertch and Olbia (cf. Becker, ibd. Suppl. IV, p. 471, 
no. 34; p. 477, no. 10; p. 482, nos. 36, 87; Suppl. V, p. 507, 
nos. 43, 44; Suppl. X, p. 28, no. 17, and Becker, Mélanges 
Gréco-Romains, I, p. 493, no. 8). Heracleides as the name of 
the potter occurs on a Thasian vase-handle (cf. Becker, zbzd. 
Suppl. X, p. 20, no. 6, from Kertch and references given there 
in note 17); but this is the first time the combination of these 
two names occurs, so far as I know. For a Sinopean named 
Heracleides, who wrote epigrams, cf. Anth. Pal. VII, 281, 
392, 465. For Demetrius as a Sinopean name, cf. No. 40 and 
Amherst Papyri 11. nos. 42, 55. 


3. An oblong stamp: length, 0.06 m.; width, 0.02 m. 
Letters, 0.005 m. in height. To the right a bunch of grapes 


as symbol. 
EFIEAr OY ᾿Επιέλπου 
A=TYN? ἀστυνοόΐ μου 
OEYAQPOY Θευδώρου 


A vase-handle from Olbia (Becker, ἐδὲά. Suppl. IV, p. 478, 
no. 16) is identical. It is not possible to decide whether we 


290 DAVID Μ. ROBINSON 


should read ἐπὶ "Ἕλπου or ᾿Επιέλπου. Neither name is to 
be found in Pape-Benseler, Griechische Eigennamen, or Fick- 
Bechtel, Griechische Personennamen. Elpus might be a Kose- 
name for Elpinicus (for ἐπὶ, cf. Becker, iid. Suppl. X, 
pp- 113, 230). But the name ’EséeA7os occurs in an inscrip- 
tion from Sinope (cf. No. 40). ᾿Επιέλπου ἀστυνόμου occurs 
in WV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 478, no. 17; V, p. 498, 
no. 14; and X, p. 26, no. 7. The form @evdmpov instead of 
the Ionic Θεοδώρου, which we should expect in a Milesian 
colony, shows that the manufacturer was of Doric extrac- 
tion. The same form appears ibid. IV, p. 483, no. 39; p. 484, 
no. 45; X, p. 31, no. 8; in Dumont, Inscriptions Céramiques 
de Gréce, VIII, p. 317, nos. 121, 122. The Ionic form occurs 
on vase-handles, V. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 469, no. 23, 
and Athen. Mitt. xxi, p. 177, no. 11. 


4. An oblong stamp: length, 0.04 m.; width, 0.02 m. Let- 
ters, 0.003 m. in height. 


KEPAMI Kepape | ws 
PEVORAT OY Τεύθρα τοῦ 
OYMOXAP°YS Θυμοχάρους 


κεραμέως is not a proper name, but refers to the proprietor of 
the establishment (cf. Becker, NV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, 
Ρ. 487, no. 47). The name of the fabricant’ TedOpas occurs 
ibid. IV, p. 478, no. 14 (Tev@pa[vros]);. V, p. 477, no. 6; 
p. 497, nos. 12,13; p. 498, no. 14; p. 499, no. 16; X, p. 225, 
no. 9. The usual form of the genitive is Τεύθραντος. Here 
we have Tev@pa (for two forms of gen. cf. No. 2). 


5. An oblong stamp: length, 0.04 m.; width, 0.015 m. 
Letters, 0.003 m. in height. : 


E fl | ἐπὶ 
ATEMAX°Y ᾿Αγεμάχου. 
ΔΑΛΕΙΡΥ Δαλείου 


The same inscription is found on Rhodian vase-handles from 
Olbia (cf. ibid. IV, p. 454, no. 2) and from Pergamum (cf. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 297 


Frinkel, Die Inschriften von Pergamum, Il, p. 436, no. 781). 
‘The magistrate’s name ’Ayéuayos occurs frequently on Rhodian 
vase-handles (cf. C.J.G. UI, pref. nos. 10-12: Becker, Mé- 
langes Gréco-Romains, I, p. 420, nos. 83-7: 16. XII, 1 CZ. 6. 
Ins.) 1065, 1, 2,3; Athen. Mitt. XXIII, p. 232; on an amphora- 
handle found at Pergamum, Athen. Mitt. XXVII, p. 147). 
Δαλίου is the usual form for the genitive of the Rhodian 
month, but here εἰ is carelessly used for 1, due perhaps to the 
form Καρνείου, also a month in. the Rhodian calendar (for simi- 
lar mistakes cf. NV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. X, p. 87). It is 
not surprising to find vase-handles of Rhodian fabric in Sinope, 
which was on friendly terms with Rhodes. In fact we learn 
from. Polybius (1V, 56) that, when Sinope was attacked by 
Mithradates II, an appeal for help was made to Rhodes, and 
the Rhodians sent besides other things ten thousand κεράμια 
oivov. Perhaps we have the handle of one of these κεράμια. 
(Streuber, Sinope, Ein Historisch-Antiquarischer Umriss, pp. 
81-84, gives the right year for this attack, 220 B.c., but thinks 
the besieger was Mithradates IV; I follow Meyer, Gesch. des 
Kénigreichs Pontus, pp. 52, 56, and Reinach, Mithradate 
Eupator, p. 40.) 


6. An oblong stamp: length, 0.03 m.; width, 0.015 m. 
Letters, 0.003 m. in height. 


[ἐπὶ] 
ΔΙΟΓΕΝΗ Διογένη 
ΑΛΛΙΟΥ .«αλλώου 


The magistrate’s name Διογένης occurs frequently on vase- 
handles. (Cf. ΟἋΑ1 α΄. Ill, pref. xiv, nos. 50-57. Dumont, 
Inse. Cér. de Gréce, p. 176, nos. 206-220; p. 282, no. 60; - 
N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. XVII, p. 294, nos. 26, 27; 
Athen. Mitt. XXI, pp. 147 f., nos. 67-76.) For the genitive 
in », cf. Meisterhans*, Gram. der att. Inser. p. 120, 9. 


7. An oblong stamp: length, 0.07 m.; width, 0.02 m. Let- 
ters, 0.003 m. in height. To the right a Nike driving a quad- 
riga, as symbol. 


208 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


AZTYN°OM°PYNT°PR ἀστυνομοῦντος 
ΧΟ ΟΝ ΤῊΝ Χορ[ηγ ]}ίωνος τοῦ 
ΛΈ: ἘΌΝΤΙ S Λεω[μ)]έδοντος 
MIOPAAATH® Mc6padarns 


Χορηγίων as ἀστύνομος occurs in WV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. 
V, p. 491, no. 59, and Χορηγίων τοῦ Λεωμέδοντος ibid. no. 60, 
which has the same symbol as our vase-handle, the name of 
the fabricant being Evaivetos. Μιθραδάτης as the name of 
the fabricant occurs in Becker, Mélanges Gréco-Romains, I, 
p- 485, no. 14; WV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 465, nos. 4, 5; 
p. 466, no. 12; p. 480, no. 26a; ibid. Suppl. V, p. 478, no. 11. 
The combination of these two names has not previously been 
found, so far as I know. But all three names were known in 
Sinope (cf. Nos. 31, 40, and Strabo XII, 545). Hence it may 
be we have here the stamp of a Sinopean manufacturer. 


8. An oblong stamp: length, 0.05 m.; width, 0.015 m. 
Letters, 0.004 m. in height. To the right a dolphin in the 
claws of an eagle, the same symbol as in No. 1. ; 


ErTIENAF ἐπὶ ᾿Ενδήϊμου 
ΜΩΡΙΟ Τι]μώριος 


N. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 478, no. 13, from Olbia, and 
ibid. Suppl. X, p. 27, no. 9, from Kertch, are identical. The 
symbol is also the same, but we can draw no argument from 
that, since it occurs on coins of Olbia as well as of Sinope. 
For the omission of ἀστυνόμου see Becker, ibid. Suppl. V, p. 478. 
In WV. Jahrb. Suppl. X, p. 26, no. 8, and p. 220, no. 4, we have 
"Evi ᾿Ενδήμου ἀστυνόμου. In the cases cited above and ibid. 
Suppl. V, p. 479, no. 14, and Suppl. X, p. 219, no. 3, ἀστυνό- 
μου is omitted after "Evdjuov. The fabricant Τιμώριος is 
known also from ibid. Suppl. IV, p. 474, no. 11a; Suppl. X, 
Ῥ. 28, no. 17; Compte-Rendu (1859), p. 142, no. 21. 


9. An oblong stamp: length, 0.05 m.; width, 0.925 m. 
Letters, 0.004 m. in height. To the right a herm as symbol. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 299 


NOM°Y ἀστυνόμου 
PF LS Ἢ (δὴ δείδω ἹἹκε]σίου τοῦ 
ANT TL ΓΑΥΡΟΥ ᾿Αντι[π͵]άτρου 
ΥΤΗΞΩΝ Κτήσων 


Hicesias the son of Antipater as ἀστύνομος occurs 4180 1η J. 
Jahrb. Suppl. V, p. 481, no. 24, from Olbia, with a statue of 
Hermes as symbol, and also on a vase-handle from Athens with 
the same symbol as our example (cf. Athen. Mitt. XXI, p. 178, 
no. 14). Hicesias was the name of the father of Diogenes the 
Cynic (C.J.G. 7074 and Diog. L. VI, 20) and so is a good 
Sinopean name. Have we not here and in the following per- 
haps a stamp of Sinopean manufacture? For the fabricant 
Κτήσων cf. Becker, Mélanges Gréco-Romains, p. 486, no. 19; 
p- 487, no. 29; p. 488, no. 31; p. 489, no. 41; WV. Jahrb. f. kl. 
Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 466, no. 13; p. 471, no. 29; V, p. 488, 
no. 48; X, p. 30, no. 27. 


10. An oblong stamp: length, 0.045 m.; width, 0.02 m. Let- 
ters, 0.004 m.in height. Same symbol as in the preceding stamp. 


=TYN°M°PYN ἀ]στυνομοῦν[ τος 
ΠΟΥ ΓΕ ΞΙΟΥ τοῦ [[Ἰκ]εσίου 
ΠΥΑΝ TIE ATPoY τοῦ ᾿Αντιπάτρου 
ΕΥ̓ΚΛΗΞ Εὐκλῆς 


For the fabricant Εὐκλῆς cf. Becker, op. cit. p. 487, nos. 26, 30; 
p- 488, no. 32; WN. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 470, no. 25, 
and Nos. 14, 17 of this article. 


11. An oblong stamp: length, 0.05 m.; width, 0.03 m. 
Letters, 0.003 m. in height. ‘To the right a Nike as symbol. 


[ἀστυνόμου] 
᾿ς eee μὰς τς ἡ Ilpar |a[ yop jou 
toy we his OY τοῦ Κυνίσκου 
ἈΠ EEL? = ᾿Απατούριος 


The fabricant ᾿Απατούριος is found in Becker, Mélanges, I, 
p- 486, no. 20; p. 489, nos. 43, 44; MW. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. 


900 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


Suppl. V, p. 476, no. 1; p. 485, no. 38; p. 490, ho. 57. The 
same astynomus Protagoras, son of Cyniscus, and the same 
symbol, are found in Becker, Mélanges, I, p. 488, nos. 36, 37 ; 
N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 489, no. 51. We have the 
same astynomus in another vase-handle from Sinope (No. 14). 
-Yerakis reads Πρωταγόρου [τοῦ Λα]μίσκου, a name unknown 
on vase-handles. He probably mistook N for M. We should 
read Kuvicxov. For Protagoras as the name of a Sinopean ef. 
IG. (C.LA.) I, 3, 3351. 


12. An oblong stamp: length, 0.06 m.; width, 0.03 τὰ. 
Letters, 0.004 m. in height. To the right a heart as symbol. 


AS PY NEMO A TOR ἀστυνομοῦντος 
APOAAQNIA?Y ᾿Απολλωνέδου 
eT OY FES A NT SA, tov Ποσιδωνίου 
EYKAH®& Εὐκλῆς 


The same astynomus occurs in NV. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil. Suppl. 
V, p. 477, no. 5. An identical vase-handle from Sinope (No. 
17) is in the possession of Mr. Syméonidis. For Posidonius 
cf. No. 40; 

Dumont (Jnse. Cér. de Gréce, p. 141) concluded that vase- 
handles on which ἀστύνομος occurs are of Cnidian origin. But 
Becker (WV. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil. Suppl. X, pp. 67 and 108) showed 
that such vase-handles come from a city on the Pontus, and 
named Olbia as the place of manufacture. The fact that so 
many names found among Sinopeans (Choregion, Demetrius, 
Diogenes, Dorus, Heracleides, Hicesias, Leomedon, Mithradates, 
Posidonius, and Protagoras) occur on our vase-handles leads 
me to doubt if all with an ἀστύνομος inscription were made in 
Olbia. Sinope may also have manufactured amphoras, and 
exported them to the northern shore where so many handles 
similar to ours have been found. 


Nos. 13-17 were published by Yerakis, Revue des Etudes 
Anciennes, 1901, pp. 352, 3538. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 301 


13. ἀστυνομοῦντος ] | Ηρακλείδου | τοῦ Mi[ xp] lov 

Yerakis reads Mz[y]éov; but no such name occurs on vase- 
handles. For Ἣρακλειδης τοῦ Μικρίου cf. N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. 
Suppl. IV, p. 462, no. 21; V, p. 480, no. 17; X, p. 27, nos. 
11, 12; p. 220, no. 6. 

14. ἀστυνομοῦντος | Ipwraydpou | [τοῦ Κυ]νίσκου | [Εὐκ]λῆς 


Yerakis reads τοῦ Λα]μίσκου., but cf. remarks on No. 11. 


15. ἀστ])υνομοῦϊ ντος ]  ᾿ΑπημάἼντου | [᾿Αρτε]μιδώρου 
Yerakis reads ἱΐἵππολ }ύτου in the second line. For ᾿Απημάν- 
του οἵ. NV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 477, no. 8. 
16. ἀστυνομοῦντος | ᾿Απολλωνίδου | τοῦ ἸΤοσειδωνίου | Εἰδᾶς 
17. ἀστυνομοῦντος | ᾿Απολλωνίδου | τοῦ ἸΠοσιδωνίου | [Εὐ]- 
κλῆς 
Cf. No. 12. ᾿Απολλωνίδης τοῦ ἸΠοσειδωνίου occurs in WV. 
Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 477, no. 5a 
18. Parnassos, VI, p. 869. 
ἀστυνόμου Διονυσίου 
19. Ἕλλ. φιλ. Σύλλογος ἐν Κωνστ. (1880-81), LE’, παρ- 
ἄάρτημα, p. 47, no. ὃ α. 
ἀστυνόμου ἸΤο[ σι]δείου τοῦ [ΘΊ7εα[ρί]ωνος 
Mordtmann in the Syllogos reads τοῦ ᾿Εάμωνος, but no such 
name is known on vase-handles. The © escaped his eye, and 
he mistook PI for M. For Ποσιδεῖος τοῦ Θεαρίωνος cf. NV. Jahrb. 
f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 486, no. 45; p. 488, no. 48. For 
Θεαρίων cf. ibid. V, pp. 499, 500, and No. 96 of this article. 
20. Syllogos, ibid. ὃ β. 


ἀστυνόμου | .......- Ι Αἰσχίνου 


21. Syllogos, ibid. 8 y. 


ἀστυνόμου | ἸΤυθοκλέους | ΤΓλαυκία 


902 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


22. Annali del. Inst. XIX (1847), p. 342. 
ἀστυνόμου | ᾿Αττάλου | Φιλοκράτους 
23. Ibid. 
ἀστυνόμου | Ναύπωνος Καλλισθένους] | Κλεαίνετος 


The reading in the Annali is Navtiwvos; but cf. V. Jahrb. 7. 
kl. Phil. Suppl. V, pp. 485, 493, 506. 


DEDICATIONS 


24. In a district called Φοῦλα, near Gherzeh, the ancient 
Karousa (cf. Arrian, Peripl.), six hours east of Sinope, a 
very large block of native stone, 1.14 m. long; 0.73 m. high; 
0.22 m. thick. The inscription is in the upper left-hand corner, 
0.22 m. high, 0.43 m. long. Letters, 0.03 m. high, well cut. 


AIAIKAIOE YNQI =... Ὁ 
MESA μεγάλῳ, 
ΓΤΎΘΗΣ ΔΙΟΙΝΥΣΣΙΟῪ πόθ διονυσών 
ΣΤΡΑΤΗΓΩΝ vipa 
XAPI> T IPION 
Δικαιόσυνος as an epithet of Zeus is known, though rare (cf. 
Bekker, Anecd. 34,11; Eust. 918,48; Schol. Hom. J/. 13, 29; 


Kock, C.A.F. III, Adesp. 752). Kock says, “ videtur epithe- 
ton a comico fictum,” but its occurrence in an inscription 


brings new evidence against him. Dionysius is known as a 
name for Sinopeans, but this is the first instance of that of 
Pythes at Sinope. χαριστήριον is common in inscriptions after 
the time of Alexander and of the Roman Age. It is fore- 
shadowed in old Attic inscriptions by col χάριν ἀντιδιδούς or 
the like; cf. ZG. (C.IA.) I, 397 and 16. IX, ΤΟΣ 
IIT), 390. Rouse (Greek Votive Offerings, p. 329) gives a 
list of inscriptions in which χαριστήριον occurs. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 303 


25. At Lala in the Oretzan χωράφι (farm), about four hours 
east of Sinope, a rectangular native-stone altar, with projection 
at top and bottom and hole, 0.07 m. square, in top. The lower 
part is rough, showing that it was meant to be set in the 
ground. Total height, 0.91 m.; width, 0.35 m.; thickness, 
0.32 m. Inscription, 0.305 m. high. Letters, 0.03 m. 


Al AOL T Y ἀγαθῇ τύζχῃ 

A EIHAIGONAY Aci ‘Halo “i [ vda- 
MEIN ETTI-KO¢ μήνῳ ἐπηκόῳ, 
ΛΔΟΥΚΙΟΊΣΈΕΓ. ἜΡΙΣ ὈπραῦΣ 
(ΟΣΑΠΟΛΛῪ ἐφ τῆμος 
ἜΤΟΥΣ ἘΥΧΗΣ χάριν 


XAPIN 


On Zeus Helios cf. Robert-Preller, Griechische Mythologie, 
p. 136, note 1; Farnell, Greek Cults, I, p.44; Roscher, Lex. Myth. 
s. Juppiter. Zeus Helios at Sinope would be identical with 
Serapis (cf. Nos. 30, 64). No such epithet as va... μήνω is 
given either in Robert’s index or Bruchmann’s Epitheta Deorum 


304. DAVID M. ROBINSON 


or in the article ‘Jupiter’ in Daremberg et Saglio. Perhaps 
να[υδα]μήνω is to be read. Traces of Y appear on the stone. 
A somewhat similar epithet of Zeus is Εὐρυδάμηνος (cf. J. HLS. 
XVIII (1898), p. 96). ᾿Ἑπήκοος also is wanting in the lists 
of Robert and Bruchmann, but it occurs in inscriptions from 
the Pontus (cf. B.C\H. XXV [1901], p. 28; Latyschev, Jnse. 
Ant. Orae Sept. Pont. Euzx. II, nos. 438, 446-448, 454, 455, 
457; Dittenberger, Orient. Graec. Insc. 28; 72, note2; COL. 6. 
2290; J.H.S. XVIII [1898], p. 311, no. 13). On the inter- 
change of ε and ε as in Ae cf. Meisterhans ὃ, Gram. der att. Inse. 
§ 10. Ae[t] is found in 0.1.5. XIX (1899), p. 77, no. 35. 


26. In the district Giousouphlou, in the Χωριὸ ᾿Εμριλῆ near 
Chalabdé, where No. 27 was found, a marble altar upside 
(lown, used as the base for a post of the porch of a house. It 
has a round hole cut through from front to back, connecting 
with ἃ similar hole from the bottom. Height, 0.49 m.; width, 
0.56 m.; thickness, 0.30 m. Letters, 0.035 m. 


θεῷ μεγάλ[ῳ 
ὑψίστῳ εὐχῆς] 
χά[ριν ἀνέ]θη- 
κε.... [λ7ος 

μετὰ [τῆς γυ]ναι- 
k |os ἱΡου[φ]είνης 


In an inscription from Sinope already published (No. 29) 
θεὸς ὕψιστος occurs, on which cf. Farnell, Greek Cults, I, 
pp. 51, 151, 155; Robert-Preller, op. cit. p. 116, 11; p. 159, 2; 
p. 866; B.C.H. VIII, p. 456 and XXV, p. 25. For the name 
“Ῥουφείνη cf. J.H.S. XIX (1899), p. 129, no. 152, and 8. Ο( Η͂. 
XXV (1901), p. 88. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 305 


27.1 In Chalabdé, two hours from Ajandik, which is twelve 
hours west from Sinope, a marble altar, 0.58 m. high, 0.265 m. 
wide, 0.28 m. thick. Letters, 0.025 m. in height, except in 
first line, where they are 0.015 m. high. 


L 


ATA OHIT YX HI , SOF 
ΘῈ OHPAKAEL repli 2 
l°YK°YN Acd ΡΈΕΙ ον ΟΝ 
ΕΥΧ H> XAPIN εὐχῆς χάριν 
TONBOMON | Tov βωμὸν 


AVE@QHKE ee 


This inscription was very poorly published (Revue des Etudes 
Anciennes, 1901, p. 357, no. 17) by Yerakis, who had not seen 
the altar at all. He reads τῷ θεῷ Ἡρακλεῖ | τόνδε βωμὸν | ‘Tepo- 
Kovoos εὐχῆς χάριν | ἀνέθηκε. I give the correct text from 
my copy and squeeze. It is not surprising to find a cult of 
Heracles at Sinope, for Autolyeus, its mythical founder, was 
a member of the expedition of Heracles against the Amazons 
(Plut. Lue. 23; Appian, Mithr. 83; Apoll. Rhod. II, 959; 
Val. Flaccus, V, 116; Hyginus, Fad. XIV). And it was 
Heracles who took Sinope and established Greeks in it, cf. 
LG. XIV (1.G.8.1.), 1293 A, 1. 101. 

1 Since this article was written I have noticed that Gustave Mendel also has 


published Nos. 26 and 27 in B.C.H. XXVII, p. 333. In No. 27 he omits the 
first line and fails to mention Yerakis. 


306 | DAVID M. ROBINSON 


28. Syllogos, ibid. p. 45, no. 2; B.C.H. XIII, p. 304, no. 8, 
an altar. 

᾿Ασκληπιῷ | Σωτῆρι καὶ | Ὑγιείφ τὸν | βωμὸν ᾿Οφίλ λιος 
Πολύκαρπος εὐχήν. 


The name Ophillius occurs in an inscription from the neigh- 
boring Karousa (cf. 6.1. 6. 4166, our No. 52). 


29. Syllogos, ibid. p. 45, no. 3; B.C.H. XIII, p. 304, no. 7. 


θεῷ ὑψίστῳ | Αἴλιος Θρεπτίων | ἸΠοντιανὸς Σεουϊῆρος Μάκερ 
οἱ | ἀδελφοὶ εὐξάμενοι 


90. Syllogos, ibid. p. 44, πο. 1. 
θεῷ | ᾿Ἡλιοσα)ράπει | ᾿Α [ο]υεῖτο[ς] | Popapi[s] | εὐχήν 


81. 6.1.6. 4102: Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, App., 
. 60. | 
τὸ Λε͵ωμέδων ᾿Αριστώνα[ κ͵τος Φλογίῳ 
Λεωμέδων is known asa Sinopean name. Δωμέδων or Λωμέδων 
is not. Phlogius was a companion of Autolycus, the mythical 
founder of Sinope (cf. Plut. Lue. 23; Apoll. Rhod. II, 956 ; 
Val. Flaccus, V, 115; Hyginus, Fab. XIV; Anon. Peripl. 
Pont. Hux. sec. 22 = Miller, Geogr. Graec. Min. I, p. 407; 
Ps. Scymnus, Orbis Descriptio, 945 = Miiller, op. cit. p. 236). 


32. Syllogos, ibid. p. 47. Fragment of architrave built into 
wall of the acropolis ‘near No. 33. 


Β]7οΐσκος Mova.... 


The name is probably to be restored as Botoxos, which occurs 
in oriental inscriptions (cf. spit diet Orient. Gr. Inse. 20, 
26, 27, 29). 


33. Syllogos, ibid. p. 47; Le Bas et Waddington, Voyage 
Arch. III, 1814; Hommaire de Hell, Voyage en Turquie et en 
Perse, IV, p. 350, pl. xii, 2. 


n γὼ ἡ » / 4 n 
ov ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἀνέθηκεν Kai TH 
πατρίδ[ ι] δ[ιὰ τοῦ] τρο[ dé ]ws αὐτοῦ Λικινίου 
Χρυσογόνου ᾽λυ...... 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 307 


34. Built into the north wall, near No. 36, an architrave upside 
down, with the following inscription. Length, 1.85 m.; width, 
0.58 m. Letters, 0.06 m. in height. Broken at both ends. 


(IONKAIAYTOYE METATON=TIEIPOK 


e - 
ὁ δεῖνα ἀνέθηκε τοὺς κίονας εἰς τὸ περιστύλ]ιον, καὶ αὐτοὺς μετὰ 
τῶν σπειροκ[ εφάλων λιθίνους κατεσκεύασεν 


The recent destruction of the hospital brought to light this 
inscription as well as No. 36. It was first published in 1829 
by Rottiers, [tineraire de Tiflis ἃ Constantinople, p. 283, who 
made-.a very careless copy, reading μετὰ ὧν σπειροσ-- It was 
not seen by Hamilton, who visited Sinope in 1836. Some tex 
years later Le Bas published a correct copy of the stone (Hom- 
maire de Hell, Voyage en Turquie et en Perse, 1846-48, IV, 
p- 346 and pl. xi, 2), but he gives no credit to Rottiers for its 
discovery. Both Rottiers and Le Bas say that the inscription 
is built into the south wall, whereas it is in the north wall. 
The inscription is also found in @./.G@. III, p. 1114, Add. et 
Corr. 4158. ‘There it is taken to be the “ residua ex praescrip- 
tis” of the epigram C./. G. 4158, and the idea is given that it is 
on the same stone. The form of the alpha is wrong. It is in 
every case A, not A. In fact, the inscription is on an architrave, 
while C./.G. 4158 is on a rectangular block, also built into the 
north wall, but some distance away, and is perhaps to be con- 
nected with the similar inscriptions on architraves at Sinope 
(ef. No. 33). In C.L.G. 3148, 1. 19, occurs the phrase κείονα 
σὺν σπειροκεφάλῳ. and ibid. 1. 29 κείονας σὺν σπειροκεφάλοις. So 
the likelihood is that αὐτούς is equivalent to κίονας and that the 
columns for some structure, perhaps a περιστύλιον, have just 
been mentioned. Le Bas takes αὐτούς to be “ chapiteaux,” and 
σπειροκ[ εφάλων]. “les volutes.”” But the word comes from 
σπεῖρα. the base of an Ionic column (cf. Pollux, Onomasticon, 
VII, c. 27, sec. 121), and κεφαλή. the capital of a column. [Ὁ 
therefore means “base and capital.” In imperial times it was 


908 : DAVID M. ROBINSON 


the custom for people of wealth to share the expense of a 
building (cf. for example, C.1.G. 2718, 2714 = Le Bas and 
Waddington, Voyage Arch. 111]. nos. 313-318). One paid for 
the columns, another for the entablature. In the case of the 
inscription from Sinope one man paid for the columns, in- 
cluding base and capital. 


35. Built into the wall of a house in the Turkish quarter, | 
a stone, broken on all sides, 0.26 m. by 0.26 m., with the fol- 
lowing inscription. Letters, 0.05 m. in height. 


hoe Ξ᾿ ῳ 0/ ΡΝ 


os] Σκυρεί[ων τὸν αὗ- 


LK --- \ τῶν] εὐεργέ[ την 


One is tempted at first sight to restore Διογένη τὸν φιλόσο- 
gov, and this may be right; but the form of the sigma dates 
the inscription much later than the time of Diogenes the Cynic 
from Sinope, of whom statues were erected (cf. Diog. Laer. VI, 
78). It might be a later Diogenes, who lived in the time of 
Vespasian (cf. Dio Cassius, LX VI, 15). Still the restoration 
is uncertain. The name might be Athenogenes or Protogenes, 
or the like. For the practice of decreeing honors and even 
statues in the provinces, cf. Mommsen, Rém. Gesch. V, p. 266, 
and Pliny, Hp. X, 58 and 60, where the case concerns a philos- 
opher. For εἰ representing short ὁ cf. Meisterhans®, Gram. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 309 


der att. Inse. ὃ 15, 27. The earliest datable example pre- 
‘viously reported is 1.6. (C.1.A.) III, 694, 4 (after 98 a.p.). 
Ours would be still earlier. 


36. Built into the north wall near the main central gateway, ᾿ 
where the hospital formerly stood, a large block of grayish 
marble: height, 0.98 m.; width, 0.49 m.; height of letters, 
0.03 m. ‘The inscription begins 0.20 m. below the top of the 
stone and ends 0.41 m. above the bottom. 


TAIONMAPKION 
K I-l ΝΣ CPI N ON. Γαῖον Μάρκιον 


Κηνσωρῖνον 


ef Ε. x. ἘΠ ae |-| N τ πρεσβευτὴν 


Καίσαρος τὸν 
ΚΑΙΣΑΡΟΣΤΟΝ τράγον, 
ΚΗ ΔΕΜΟΝΑΤΗ͂Σ 


POAEQX OAHMOZX 


310 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


This Censorinus is undoubtedly the C. Marcius Censorinus ἢ 
who was consul in the year 8 B.c. along with C. Asinius 
Gallus, and proconsul in Asia and died there about the year 
2 A.D. (Velleius, II, 102). He was praised by the Jews of 
Asia (cf. Josephus, Ant. 16, 6, 2), and is called by Velleius 
(loc. cit.) a “vir demerendis hominibus genitus,” which sug- 
gests the epithet κηδεμόνα τῆς πόλεως which is applied to him 
in this inscription. He is honored in inscriptions from Perga- 
mum? and Mylasa (C.7.G. 26986). One might be tempted to 
identify him with the Censorinus, the commander of the Roman 
fleet which was defeated by Cleochares and Seleucus, tyrants 
of Sinope, shortly before the capture of the city by Lucullus in 
70 B.c. (cf. Memnon, 53 and 54 = Frag. Hist. Gr. III, pp. 
_ 504 ff.). But it is unlikely that a man who was old enough to 
be commander of the fleet then should live till the year 2 A.D. 
Furthermore, Horace in an ode to Gaius Marcius Censorinus 
(Od. IV, 8), who is probably the same man, includes him among 
his sodales, and from this we are justified in assuming that 
Gaius Marcius Censorinus was born about the same time as 
Horace (65 B.c.). κηδεμὼν τῆς πόλεως occurs already in Plat. 
Rep. 111, 412 c. 


37. B.C.H. XIII, p. 302, no. 3; Syllogos, ibid. p. 47, no. 5. 
Built into the wall of the Képhéli-Djami. 


᾿Αγριππείναν Tep|wavixod Καίσαρος | ὁ δῆμος 


38. Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca ex Lapidibus, no. 907; 
O.1.G. 4158 ; Hamilton, op. eit. no. 58; Hommaire-de Hell, 
op. eit. IV, p. 347, pl. XI, 4; Le Bas et Waddington, op. cit. 
III, no. 1812. Large stone, 0.86 τη. wide, 1.50 τη. high, and 
0.85 m. thick, now built into a square tower of the north 
wall. Letters, 0.04 m. high. Three Christian crosses at the 
top of the inscription. 


1 Cf. Dessau, Prosopographia Imperii Romani, ΤΙ, s. ‘ C. Marcius Censori- 
nus’; cf. also Pauly-Wissowa, Encyclopddie, s. ‘ Censorinus,’ no. 2. 
2 Frankel, Die Inschriften von Pergamum, no, 422. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 311 


I add a reproduction from a photograph to show clearly the 
forms of the letters and the division of the verses. It should 
be noted that the pentameter begins further in than the hex- 
ameter, and that the second half of each verse has a somewhat 
deeper indentation than the beginnings of the pentameters. 
Line 4 begins where the hexameters do because it is 
longer than the others. The hexameters and pentameters are 
divided at the caesura. This inscription shows probably the 
Alexandrian method of writing elegiac verse. Neither Εὐλά- 
voto nor Εὐδάμοιο nor Εὐλάμοιο is the correct reading in line 5. 
Εὐλαλίοιο is clear on the stone. 


39. C.I.G. 4157. Yerakis, Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 
1901, p. 357, no. 16, gives a poorer copy than the C.1.G. and 
publishes the inscription as if it were unknown. 


εν os, [y]ev[ ou Je[vov γυμ- 
ν]ασίαρχον, ἄρχο[ τα τοῦ 
mp lec B[ ut |tx[ οὔ, πο]ντάρχην. ἐπιτε- 
λέσαντα ταυροκα θάψια 


καὶ κυνηγέσιον καὶ betes ] 


512 


DAVID M. ROBINSON . 


χίαν μ[ ey 7 αλο[π]Ίρε[ 7] as, ἔκγονον 
Κλαύδιον ἸΤοτέ[λιον 

ἀδελφ[ὸν δ]ὲ [τῇ]ς κρα[τίστης 
συγκλητικῆς Κὔῇλαυδίας 

Παύλης, ἱερείας [θεᾶς 

Εὔ[σ]ιδ[ος, o]¢ συνπροσ[ τάται 

καὶ ὁ συνέφορ(ος) [é]m εὐ[νοίᾳ τῇ εἰς αὐ 


7 
TOUS. 


The reading in line 7, Κλαύδιον ἸΠοτέ[λιον, is not given in 
the C.J. G., but is clear on the stone. 

40. Yerakis, Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, pp. 354, 355. 
Stone 0.56 m. high, 0.31 m. wide, 0.08 m. thick. Letters very 
indistinct. Inscription of the Macedonian epoch. 


N MM ofYAAKe NT ZLIP 'AHMoOYToO 
EP tS Ar ῬΡΥΙΆΝΕΙ EN T 2.1 
“ANH/ MH T E #TIAIPY NEIA 
APT eR Se Eee 
MHTPI< AAAIKPAT OY 
AION: <10= APXITPoy 
AAMAX < 

| OZ KAAAIZ GENO 
\HMH T P10 ΦΙΝΤΙΟΞ 
ΟΣΕΊΔΩΝΙ]ΟΞ MEIZ 


AIOSGANT OLEYAAMP IXY 
Ar “A= BABY T Tor 


CT AHPIZAEMBIOY | 
ἈΑΦΡΟΔΙΞΊ ΟΣ AGP OAIZIOY ~ 
HtAI=TIo= E=HKE=T OY 
Sk HMIoAn Poe o/ (Mor 
AHM0=TPAT°= PPOMHOIANo& 
ΟΥΛΗΙΞ EMIZT ΕὙΟΝΝΤΟΣ ΔΙΟΝΎΣΙο 
oYAPXIPMoY TPAMMATEYeNTo& 
AAMAX OY ΤΟΥ ΧΟΡΗΓΊΩΝΟΣ 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 313 


ν[ο]Ἱ μοφυλακ[ οὔ]ντ[ ο]ς ᾿Επιδήμου το[ῦ] | ᾽ἜἘπ[{Πέ[λ] που] 
-πρυτάνει[ς οἱ] ἐν τῶι | [ΠΠ]ανή[ μωι] μη[νὶ] τῆι Ἑ]στίαι 
πρυ τα]νεία[.ι1] ᾿Αρίστ[ αἹρχ[ο]ς [᾿Αρ]ιστά[ρχ]ο[υ] | Μῆτρις 
[Κ Ἰαλλικράτου[ ς] | Διονύσιος ᾿Αρχίππου | Λάμαχος [..... ος 
Καλλισθένοζυς) Δημήτριος | Φίντιος  [Π7οσειδώνιος Μει[ diov] | 
Διόφαντος Εὐλαμπίχου ᾿Αγ[ελίδ]ας Βαβύττου | Τλῆρις Λεμβίου | 
᾿Αφροδίσιος ᾿Αφροδισίου | Ηφαίστιος ᾿Εξηκέστου | [᾿Α 1σκ[λ7η- 
πιόδωρος ᾿Ολύμπου | Δημόστρατος ἸΠρομηθίωνος | [β]ουλῆς 
ἐπιστ[ ατ]εύοντος Διονυσίου τ]οῦ ᾿Αρχίππου " γραμματεύοντος | 
Λαμάχου τοῦ Χορηγιώνος. 


Yerakis’ copy of this inscription is unsatisfactory. In the 
first three lines he made out only the word δήμου, and thought 
we had a list of proxenot or ephebot or founders or benefactors 
of the temple of Serapis. The reading is, however, as I have 
given it, and the list of names contains the πρυτάνεις for the 
month Ilavnpos. It is interesting to know the number of the 
πρυτάνεις in Sinope, and to learn that the office was about 
the same as in Athens. Out of the fifty πρυτάνεις in Athens 
one was chosen as president (ἐπιστάτης τῶν πρυτάνεων) and 
presided at the βουλὴ (cf. Arist. "AO. Wor. ὁ. 44 f.). A 
secretary (γραμματεὺς) was also appointed. So in Sinope 
one of the fourteen πρυτάνεις (Διονύσιος ᾿Αρχίππου) was ἐπι- 
στάτης βουλῆς and another (Λάμαχος) was γραμματεύς. In 
1. 7 the name Lamachus is written in large letters and 
the father’s name, given in the last line, omitted. For the 
number of the πρυτάνεις in places other than Athens cf. 
Swoboda, Griechische Volksbeschliisse, pp. T1, 88, 94, 200. For 
a postscript being used instead of a prescript, ef. Swoboda, 
op. cit. pp. 225 ff. For ‘Eoréa πρυτανεία, to whom the list is 
dedicated, cf. C.I.G. 2347, k 11 (p. 1059). ᾿Επίέδημος C1. 1) 
is formed similarly to the name “Evénuos, which occurs on a 
vase-handle found at Sinope (above, No. 8). The name ’Emi- 
edzros (1. 2) occurs also on vase-handles (above, No. 3). We 
- already knew that the Ionic calendar was used at Sinope. In 
an inscription from there (below, No. 63) we have the months 


314 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


Tavpeov and Ποσειδεών. In 1. 3 of this inscription occurs 
Πάνημος. In 1. 4 Yerakis omits the father’s name. In 1. θ᾿ 
he reads AKN..... Apximma. ‘The stone gives Διονύσιος ’Ap- 
χίππου. Inl. 7 he reads NAYA, but AAMAXO8& in large letters 
is clear on the stone. In ]. 12 he reads AM for AT, in 1. 18 
ἐπιτροπεύοντος for ἐπιστ[ ατ]εύοντος. In]. 2 there is a vacant 
space of two or three letters before πρυτάνεις, and in the post- 
script, 1. 19, before γραμματεύοντος. Yerakis fails to note this 
and other minor matters. 


SARCOPHAGI 


41. C.LG. 4160; Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. IV, p. 344, pl. 
x, 0; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 61. Sarcophagus, 2.10 m. long; 
0.71 m. wide; 0.67 m. high. Letters, 0.04 m. in height. 


Sg Ag tS 8 ENOA Eizr[opos] ἐνθά- 
AEKEIMAIETQN δε κεῖμαι ἐτῶν 
ΚΘ κθ΄ 


The reading in the (". 7. 6΄. is, Evv[ou]e[ aves, but an examina- 
tion of the sarcophagus itself and of a squeeze from it shows 
that there is not room enough for that name. The reading of 
Le Bas (in Hommaire de Hell, op. cit.) Εὔπορος has been over- 
looked, but is undoubtedly right. For the name Ewzopos ef. 


1.6. (C.LA.), II, 467, 1. 154. 
42. C.1I.G. 4163; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 56; Hommaire de 
Hell, op. cit. IV, p. 345, pl. x, 6. 
Ποντικὸς | [Θ] άλλου ἐτῶν νη΄ | evO(a) be κείω 


The reading on the sarcophagus is CAAAOY. The α in 
ἐνθάδε is omitted on the sarcophagus. 


43. 6.1.6. 4164; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 62. 


Lavoveivios ὁπλότερος ὠνησάμην 

\ ’ 5 ἰφ \ > x‘ vA > [4 
τὴν πύελον ἐμαυτῷ καὶ οὐδεὶς ἕτερος ἀνοίξει 
μετὰ τὸ ἐμὲ κατατεθῆναι, ἐπεί τοι δώσει τῇ 


λαμπροτάτῃ κολωνείᾳ Ἃ ad’ 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 315 


The reading of Hamilton and the C.Z.G. in 1. 1 is Σαιουείνιος 
. ὁ [vewt ]epos, but there are no traces of the letters vewr. The 
letters are SAIOYEINICS¢CTIACTE. + is the sign for δηνάρια. 


44. C.1.G. 4165; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 59; Hommaire de 
Hell, op. cit. lV, p. 350, pl. xii, 3. A sarcophagus at Nesi Kieui. 


M.1...Arépios Μάξιμος ἰατρὸς ἔθηκα 
τὴ[ν σ]ορὸν ἑαυτᾷ καὶ Zon τῇ γυναικί μου" χαίρετε 
There is no need of changing ἑαυτῷ to ἐμαυτῷ as is done in 


the C.l.G. The third person reflexive is often used in inscrip- 
tions of late date for the first person. 


45. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, p. 353, no. 6. Sar- 
cophagus used as a watering-trough near the Turkish Hospital. 


K. Λικίννιος Dpovyis | προξενητὴς ἐνθάδε | κεῖται βιώσας κα- 


os | ἐτῶν μη΄ 
40. B.C.H. XIII, 304, no. 9. Sarcophagus used as ἃ water- 
ing-trough at Kapou. 


Σύρι[ο]ς ἐνθά de κεῖμαι ἐτῶν | KO 


47. C.I.G. 4161; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 57; Le Bas et Wad- 
dington, op. cit. III, no. 1813. 
Τι(βέριον) Kravéo[v] 
“Pnyet[ νον] 
REA 
OT 


48. Ο.1.6΄. 4159; Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. p. 348, pl. xi, 5. 
Οὐδὲν ἀφαυρότερος χ[ρυ]σοῦ λίθος e[ ὑκ Ἰλέο[ς] ἀνθεῖ 
παρθενίης αἰδοῖ πεπυκασμένος. ε[ ἐμ]ὶ δὲ γείτων 
Ῥειπάνη καθαροῖο Σαράπιδος. ἔνθα με βουλ[ὴ] 
θῆκε χαρισσαμένη ἀρετῇ πατρός. ὃν περὶ πάντων 
τίμησαν βασιλῆες é[ 7] εὐ[σ]ε[ βίᾳ] βιότοιο, 
μάρτυρι πιστεύσαντες [ἐπιστασ | ίην ᾿Α μίσοιο 


... ἀπαιδείησι [7] 


316 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


- 


GRAVESTONES 


49. In an Armenian village or farm (x@pid) owned by Con- 
stantinos Balasides, near the village where No. 50 is, stone 
built into the hearth of a house, 0.65 m. long; 0.27 m. wide at 
the bottom, at top 0.25 m.; 0.075 m. thick. Letters, 0.03 m. 
high. 


μὰ AX H 2 Mans 
ZAP OANLAO ee Σαροάνδου 
SAN IP Ξ χαῖρε 


For Mans as a Sinopean name ef. 7. 6. (C.L_A.), III, 2, 2910, 
Mnvedira Maov Σινώπισσα. Maes is a name which occurs in 
the mother-town Miletus (1G. [C.2.A.], III, 2, 2746) and on 
the north side of the Pontus (cf. Latyschev, op. cit. I, no. 86; 
II, nos. 172, 427, 452; cf. also Dittenberger, Orientis Graect 
Inscriptiones, no. 375, and B.C.H. XVIII (1894), p. 682, 
no. 2. Strabo, XII, 553, informs us that Μάνης is a Paphla- 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 317 


gonian name, and perhaps Mays is also. Σαροάνδης is a bar- 
-barian name. It reminds one of such Persian names as 
᾿Αροάνδης (cf. Dittenberger, op. cit. nos. 264, 390, 391, 392,. 
393). 


50. In an Armenian village, Pachar Oglou Akel, about three 
hours east of Sinope, large marble slab with moulding at the 
sides and broken gable at the top, 0.80 m. high, 0.54 m. wide, 
0.08 m. thick. Height of inscription,-0.30 m.; width, 0.30 τη. 
‘Height of letters, which are beautifully cut, 0.025 τη. 


ΜΑΝΙΟΙ͂Σ POYABIOS || 
ΕΚΑΤΟΣΈΤΩΝ ΠΕ ΡΣ 
POYABIOSTIPAITOPE] Φούλβιος ὌΡΕΙ ΤΙΣ: 
ΝΟΣ YIO> ETON K~ νος υἱὸς ἐτῶν κ΄ 
E NOAA EKEINTAI ἐνθάδε ee : 
AIKINNIAKAISEAAIAS|| | ρα αν 
ENOA AEKEITAI- ἐτῶν ν΄ 


ae ETQN*N SD 


"» 


As might easily be the case on a family tombstone the last 
three lines seem to have been added later. They contain marks 
of punctuation which are lacking in the first five. Moreover 
the form of the θ is different, being in the last three lines ©, in 
the first five @. The form of the also differs. 


918 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


51. Inscription on gravestone built into the ἐκκλησία τῶν 
ταξιαρχῶν at Karousa, 0.32 m. high, 0.33 m. long, broken on 
all sides. Letters, 0.03 m. Built into the same church are 
Nos. 52, 58. 


τς ho Clean 

ΕἸ NAT lOY 1 Σ]έξτος ᾿Εγν[άτιος 
JTHCCTTCIPHC βννα τών ὁ... 
VBR NR. Sie ee 


ae 


This inscription has already been published by Demitsas in 
the Athen. Mitt. XIV (1889), p. 210, but his copy was incom- 
plete. Larfeld, Griechische Epigraphik (1888-94), p. 285, 
mentions it as a gravestone. The combination of Greek and 
Latin in an inscription of Roman date is not surprising. For 
the repetition of a name or signum at the end, cf. Mommsen, 
Hermes, 1902, pp. 443 f., and Wilhelm, Wiener Studien, XXIV 
(1902), pp. 596 f. The cognomen Sextus forbids us to identify 
this man with the Egnatius who was consul of Bithynia and 
Pontus in the time of Augustus (cf. Dessau, Prosopographia 
Imp. Rom. s. " Egnatius,’ no. 29). 


52. C.I.G. 4166; Hamilton, op. cit. 50. Stone built into 
same church at Karousa. | | 


Αἰμιλιανὸς ᾿Οφιλλίου Κουρίωνος cal... 


53. Ο.1.6΄. 4167; Hamilton, op. cit. 51. Also at Karousa. 


AiBovtio[s] Ma[E]cuo[s] 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 319 


54. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, p. 356, no. 14. 


KMAMALA 
AIT | OY Aandxly 
ἌΡΑ = ite 
ΞῪΝ Η πῇ O No = Συνήμαθος 
“οἰ εὖ 
Α NT | ὧ ΟὟ Ξαχίῳ 
BAK X19] oti 
MNHz_|]0= 

WAN hacen ae 


Yerakis, zbid., reads AAMAIA, but the | is the upper part of 
the ¢ in the next line, and A is not A but the lower part of X. 
Yerakis’ reading in the last line also is wrong. He reads 9IN. 
He gives the form of the ὦ as W, but it is Q. In 1.5 the E 
perhaps indicates that it is l. 5. 


55. Parnassos, VI, 869; Neologos, 1882; B.C.H. XIII, p. 
304, no. 10. 


Navva | Διονυσοίο | Στρατοκλῆς | Διονυσοίο 


56. Syllogos, ibid. p. 46, no. 6. 


Xaipis | "Adevaios | parepes (2) = ᾿Αθηναῖος Φαληρεύς 


57. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, Ρ. 353, no. 7. A met- 
rical inscription on a large stone built into the north wall to the 
right of a gateway. Yerakis (ἰδία...) gives an incomplete copy, 
and makes no attempt to divide into words, to restore, or to 
interpret the verses. 


320 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


οἸ ὗτός [τοι τάφος a]v[ dp los dv ad σοφίης ὑποφήτην 
οὐ] δ᾽ ἀνέφυ[ σε] πόλ[ις “ΙΧ. ]os Περσῆος ὅμηρον 


᾿ οὕνεκα ὁ πτεροί[ης] Tw ἐπώνυμον ad  ὄν[ησε 
ο]ὕνεκα καὶ πτεροίης δι’ ἤερος Ελλάδος ἄγοι (7) 
οὗτος καὶ πρ[ονοεῖ) Περσεὺς κυνικῆς ἐπινοίης 
ὅ]7ττι φέρ[ ε]ι κίβισιν β[ἀκ]τρω(ι) ἅρπην ἰσόμοιρον 


Oo δι ὶἐ DO WH καὶ 


After the first six verses is a space; and then follow at least 
three more verses, so badly mutilated that only a few letters 
can be read. 


OLOONEPOL ter ὁ φθονερὸς 
TWAMGIAOXWEYE τῷ ᾿Αμφιλόχω Ἐὐγζενίδου ἢ 


FFLI!wlo TORR TA -deval of .]Toyos a? 
Xx 


“ Behold, this is the tomb of a man the like of whom, once more, a 
prophet of wisdom, not even the (divine) state of Perseus caused to spring 
up as her hostage, because that winged one in turn benefited a namesake, for 
that he too on wings led the way through the air of Hellas. This Perseus 
also is mindful of the Cynic philosophy, because he carries a wallet and, as 
the equivalent of the staff, the scimitar.” 


In 1. 3 πτεροίης is to be read as in 1. 4, where it is clear on 
the stone: We should expect πτερόεις. In 1. 8, at the end, we 
have AYEON or AYCON. Perhaps we can restore αὖ é dv[ nae, 
in which case € equals αὐτὸν, or édv[noe. In 1. 4 the reading of 
Yerakis, AFTON, can hardly be right, since the alpha is short. 
But there is the same objection to ayo. The Γ might be 
C (sigma). On the stone N is not visible, only |. In 1. 5 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 321 


πρ[ονοεῖ just fills the space. The letters often are not close 
together. The El of φέρει in 1. 6 takes the space of three 
letters. In 1. 2 there is an empty space between Περσῆος and 
ὅμηρον: and in 1. 4 it seems as if the stonecutter intended to 
join the H and C of πτεροίης, but did not carry out his inten- 
tion, and left a space between the two letters. The stone 
reads H LC. Inl. 6 after BAKTPW (not BATTW, as Yerakis 
reads) occurs A, which is clearly an error of the stonecutter. 
He cut A, the first letter of APTTHN, and then realized that he 
had omitted an |. He tried to add the | before the A, A. Then 
he crossed out the A thus, A, and began again the word ἅρπην. 

The clew to the interpretation of this inscription in dactylic 
hexameters is in the sixth verse. Yerakis reads --IKIBIEIN 
as if it were the infinitive of some verb. But read C for E, 
making κίβισιν, the wallet which Perseus wore (cf. Hesiod, 
Scut. 224; Pherecyd. frag. 26). The ἅρπη (1. 6) also sug- 
gests the mythical Perseus, whose cult at Sinope is attested 
by many coins (cf. Head, Historia Numorum, p. 435; Knatz, 
Quomodo Persei fabulam artifices tractaverint, pp. 34 f.; Roscher, 
Lex. Myth. s. ‘ Perseus’). There was a legend that Perseus went 
to the Hyperboreans (Pindar, Pyth. &, 45 f., and XII), and 
perhaps the Greeks would think that his route was via Sinope 
(cf. Paus. I, 31, 2). The characteristic temper of mind of the 
frontier town, Sinope, seems to have been cynical. Thence 
came the three comic poets, — Dionysius (Athenaeus, XI, 467 Ὁ, 
497 c; XIV, 615 £), Diodorus (Athenaeus, VI, 255 E, 239 B; 
X,431c; B.C.H. VII, pp. 105, 107; Am. J. Arch. IV [1900], 
p. 83), Diphilus (Strabo, XII, 546; 16. II [6.1.4. If], 3, 
3343). Thence came the cynic philosophers, Diogenes (Strabo, 
l.c.; Diog. L. Vita Diog.) and Hegesaeus (Diog. L. VI, 84). 
Menippus, whose skilful combination of prose and poetry led 
the Roman Varro into imitation, was perhaps born in Gadara 
(Strabo, XVI, 759; Steph. Byz. s.v. Gadara), but he must 
have lived at some time in Sinope, since he is called Σινωπεύς 
by Diog. L. VI, 95 (cf. Susemihl, Geschichte der Gr. Tit. in 
der Alexandrinerzeit, 1, pp. 44 f.). Perhaps, then, our inscrip- 


822, DAVID M. ROBINSON 


. . 
tion refers to some cynic philosopher, possibly named Per- 


seus (cf. 1. 3, ἐπώνυμον), who is likened to the mythical Per- 
seus. In the κυνικῆς ἐπινοίης of 1. 5 there is possibly a hint at 
the *AvdSos κυνέη which Perseus wore (cf. Hesiod, op. cit. 226). 
Just as Perseus carries his wallet («/Sio1s) and his scimitar 
(ἅρπην and flies through the air, so the cynic has his pouch 
and staff (βάκτρον) and feeds on air (Diog. L. VI, 2, 76). 


58. B.O.H. XIII, 305, no. 12; Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 
1901, p. 356, no. 15. 


cing sees Kal κτερίσματα KTepia[ avTa | 
ἤδη πληρώσαντα. περιπλομένων ἐνιαυτῶν, 


πεντήκοντα ἔτη, καὶ τελέσαντα χρόνον 


59. Built into the wall.of a house in Sinope, a block of mar- 
ble, 0.25 m. long, 0.20 m. wide, and 0.15 m. thick. Letters, 
0.03 m. in height. A Christian tombstone like Nos. 60-62. 


ΘΕ οὐ 
AR NITA 
ATOTTCPY 


60. B.CL\H. XIII, p. 305, no. 11. In the Tchetlambouk- 


mezarlik. : 2 peatore 
ἡ θέσις | Θεμιστοῦ | τοῦ Νύμφ [ὠἼνος 


61. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, 354, no. 8. 
+ θέσις | ᾿Α γαθοϊδώρου | φροντιστοῦ 

62. Ibid. no. 9. 
+ θέσις | Meyadn| μέρου | χαρκέ ov 


χαρκέου is another form for χαλκέως. 


MISCELLANEOUS 


63. Dittenberger, Sylloge?, 603; Michel, Recueil, 734. De- 
eree telling what parts of the sacrifices and what privileges the 
priest of Poseidon Heliconius is to receive. Poseidon occurs 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 323 


as early as the first half of the third century on coins of Sinope; 
. ef. Num. Chron. 1885, p. 17, pl. ii; Head, Historia Numorum, 
p- 435. } 


64. Built into the north wall of the Acropolis near the 
entrance to the prison, a block of native stone, 0.36 m. by 
0.38m. Height of letters, 0.03 m. Stone much weathered. 
Near it another inscription, which is no longer legible. 


- -- = 


ong gd EE ee 
MH ALOC “has 

ΕΓ ΓΊΝΗΙ “pu 

ee tl ὝΟΙ 
Ε΄ ATHAOOCG 

mo Cit tO 


The cult of Helios, with whom Serapis is often identified, we 
knew already from inscriptions found in Sinope (Nos. 30, 48), 
and we could.infer from names of Sinopeans like Menippus, 
Meniscus, Menodorus, Menophila, Menon, that there was a cult 
of Selene in Sinope. In fact, the very word Sinope may be 
derived from the Assyrian moon-god, Sin. For the cult of the 
moon-god Men Pharnakou on the Pontus, cf. Roscher, Lez. 
Myth. 11, 2, p. 2690, s. ‘Men.’ Hermes occurs on coins of 
Sinope (cf. Head, Historia Numorum, p. 435; Catalogue of 
Greek Coins in the British Museum, Pontus, etc., p. 98, no. 31, 
and p. 99, no. 36). In Trapezus, which was founded by Sinope, 
there was a temple and a statue of Hermes (Arrian, Peripl. Pont. 
Euzx. 3 = Miller, Geog. Gr. Min. I, p. 370). But here for the 
first time we meet Themis, Hydrachous, and Sirius in Sinope. 


324 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


65. Built into the wall of the house of Hadji-Photides in 
the Greek quarter, a block of marble, brokén at both sides, 
0.34 m. long, 0.16 m. wide. Letters, large and well cut, 
0.08 m. in height. 


cP Aor O π᾿ Ἰαράδοξο[ς 


Here we have an athlete who conquered in the πάλη and 
παγκράτιον on the same day. Whether the shorter form παρά- 
δοξος or the longer form παραδοξονίκης is to be restored we have 
no means of knowing. Both occur often in grave-inscriptions. 
For the latter cf. also Plut. Comp. Cim. ὁ. Lucull. 2; for the 
former cf. Arr. Hpict. 2, 18, 22; Dio Cass. 77, 11. 


66. Built into the wall of the same house, a broken block 
of marble, 0.43 m. long, 0.28 m. high, and 0.13 m. thick. 
Letters, 0.05 m. in height. 


|IAMAPK 


67. Syllogos, ibid. p. 47, no. T. 
Tif. “Apaxtos 


68. In the Greek quarter, in the house of Mr. Alexandros, 
marble slab, 0.19 m. high, 0.18 m. broad, 0.07 m. thick. Let- 
ters, 0.02 m. in height. 


PA Japevr| (-] 
ov ᾿Ακύλα * do if 
ε΄ ἔων τόκος. 
Σ7ελλώου 
Μάρκου 
A 


AMAPK°Y 
ΧᾺ 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 325 


This is a business account of some kind on which interest 
(τόκος) is paid. Perhaps sf (16) is the rate per cent, and 
Ἂ hoe (515 denarii) is the total of interest on Ἃ A (1000 
denarii). The time would be something over three years. 
For ᾿Ακύλας (Aquila) ef. Dittenberger, Or. Gr. Insc. nos. 206, 
535. Ibid. no. 544, 1. 9, occurs another form of the genitive 
CAxkvnrov). 


69. In Tinkilar, in the blacksmith’s shop of Chrestos Michael, 
on the high-road, six hours from Sinope, stone with cross in 
the middle and the following inscription around it. Height, 
0.20 m.; width, 0.25 m.; thickness, 0.06 m. Letters, 0.025 m. 
high. Found originally in the ruins of a mediaeval church in 
the neighboring mountains. 


EOVOEOTOKO θ]εοῦ, θεοτόκου 


70. Nos. 70 and 71 were found in a place called Προφήτης 
*HXias, two hours from Sinope, by Mr. Myrodes, who was kind 
enough to send me squeezes of the inscriptions. They are two 
of the boundary stones of some precinct, renewed in the time 
of Justinian. ‘The inscriptions are the same, but the lines are | 
differently divided, and in No. 71 σ is omitted in παραφαύστου. 


+ANE NEW OHCA + ἀνενεώθησα[ν 
OIOPOIETIITOYEY οἱ ὅροι ἐπὶ τοῦ εὐ- 
ἐξ Βε CTATOY KA | ΦΙ σεβεστάτου καὶ φι- 
λοΟΧΡις Τουῆκλωυν λοχρίστου ἡμῶν 
BACIAEWC | OYCT] βασιλέως *loveti- 


NIA NOV TOYA [UJ NI νιάνου τοῦ αἰωνί- 
οὐυὐάντους TOVK Al ov Αὐγούστου καὶ 
ΑΝ TOK PA “EO ρος αὐτοκράτορος 
TIA P AD AYC TOY TOY παραφαύστου τοῦ 
E NAOSO TATOYIA ἐνδοξοτάτου ἰλ- 


WOYCGEFIOY + Ss) λουστρίου + 


920 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


71. +ANE, AYN 
OIOPOIE TTITOYEY 
CE BECTATOY KAI 
| AOX PIC TOY 
HMUWNRACI| 

AEWCIOYCT IN 
IANOYTOYAIWINI 
OVYAT OVC T OF 
K AIAY TOKPATo 
POCTTIAPADAYT 
OY TOYEN AO 

OTATOYIA AS 
CTP ΘΟ 


+ ἀνε[νεώθησ αν 
σὺν ᾽ \ lel > 
οἱ ὅροι ἐπὶ τοῦ εὐ- 
\ 
σεβεστάτου Kal 
φιλοχρίστου 
ἡμῶν βασι- 
λέως ᾽ἼἸουστιν- 
ιάνου τοῦ αἰωνέ- 
ov ᾿Αγούστου 
καὶ αὐτοκράτο- 
pos Tapapav a )T- 
ov τοῦ ἐνδο- 
ξοτάτου ἴλλο- 


υστρίου + 


UNPUBLISHED LATIN INSCRIPTIONS 


72. In the village Koumpeti, one hour and a half east of 


Sinope, a sarcophagus, 1.96 m. long, 0.68 m. wide, 0.64 m. 


high. Part where inscription is, 0.50 m. by 0.31 m.. Letters, 


0.04 m. in height. 


\ 
LE: EN: VS 


POMPEIANVS 
ANNXXVI 


/ 


Ν 


L. Elrjen{njius 
Pompeianus 


ann. XX VI 


About L. Herennius Pompeianus we know nothing. 


73. At Ephrem Pogasi, about two hours east of Sinope, only 


a few feet from the sea, several huge adjoining stones, at least 
seven in number. The one in the middle, 1.02 m. high, 1.62 m. 
long, 0.42 m. thick, bears the following inseription. The in- 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 327 


scription begins 0.15 m. below the top and 0.81 m. from the 
left side. Letters, 0.135 m. in height, some 0.14 m. This 
would be a good place for excavations. 


ae 


~Hy ῳ ς 


_ This is perhaps L. Licinius, who was praefectus frumenti dandi 
and proconsul of Bithynia (cf. Dessau, Prosopographia Imp. Rom. 
s. ‘Licinius,’ and Ruggiero, Dizionario Epigrafico di Antichita 
_ Romane, 5. frumentarius, vol. III, p. 252). FR. is an abbrevia- 
tion for frumentarius and the inscription is in Bithynia, and deals 
with an important man, as is shown by the size of the stone and 
the letters. Φρουγίς (No. 45) might suggest Frugi here, but 
no line after R or V before G was ever cut on the stone. For 
name Licinius cf. also No. 33. ; 


74. On the farm of Hamil Kegia, about two hours and a half 
east of Sinope, a block of native stone, broken and mutilated. 
Height, 0.54 m.; width, 0.44 m.; thickness, 0.39 m. Letters, 
0.03 m. high. Probably the dedication of a servus. 


Imp era[ tori 
Cae[ sari 
— Pontius... 
ONT IV5 AL S. Sacerd. 
~S<SACERD< Sacrum 
SACRVMAA 


75. In Kiren Tsoukourou, seven hours southeast from Sinope 
by the only good high-road out of Sinope, a Roman milestone, 


328 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


used as a post for a porch, 0.92 m. in circumference at the top, 


1.04 m. at bottom. 
0.06 m. 


Height, 1.35 m. 
The natives told me that this column and No. 76 


Letters vary, 0.03 m. to 


were brought from the mountains near by. 


SDE ee PAN Ao 


M N 
PFINVICTOAVCG ET 


FLVALGONS TANT IOET 


GAWALMAX IMIA NO 
NOBILLCAE 

Pec 
AVR PRIS CIANYV 
PRPRPDN MQEORVM 


V 
DNIMPCAES VALE RIOLICINNIANO 


LICINNIOPFINVICTOAVC 


FI’‘LC°7 TANTINO 
FLVKCONSTAN TIO 
ETFLCOSTANOBBC 

ONTIVS 


oy Diocl[etiano]..... 


eoeeeree es eevee 


P.F. invicto Aug. et 
Fl. Val. Constantio et 
Gal. Val. Maximiano 
nobill. Cae. 
Mil. I 
Aur. Priscianu[s 
Pr. Pr.P.D.N.M.Q. eoruwm 
AA XV 


D.N. Imp. Caes. Valerio Licinniano 


Licinnio PF. invicto Aug. 
Cae. 


On other side 


Fl. Cl. Constantino 

et] Fl. [1 ]ul. Constantio 

et Fl. Costano (?) B. B.C. 
P jontius 


76. In same place as No. 75 another milestone, also used for 
supporting the same porch. Height, 0.78 m.; circumference 
at top, 1.02 m.; at bottom, 1.08 m. 


IMPCAESARI 
MAVREZ 


GAROPFINVICTOAYG 


ETMAYREZCARINO 


PILIOE 'YS-EMAYGMN 


NOBIZ OC AESARIZZ 
VPPRAES 


Imp. Caesari 
M. Aurel 
Caro P.F. invicto Aug. 
et M. Aurel. Carino 
? 
Nobillo Caesari L.L. 
V. P. Praes. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 329 


I have failed to find in C.L.Z. III a milestone from the Roman 
province of Pontus and Bithynia or Helenopontus, which be- 
longs to Carus or Carinus. ‘This may be the first one known. 


77. In Erikli Djami near the village where Nos. 75 and 76 
were found, a milestone with a much mutilated inscription. 


IMPC « SAR Bay: Caesar 

VESPASIANVS AVG Vespasianus Aug. : 

PON TMAXT RPOT Pont. Max. Tr. Pot. {VITIT]. 
C O DES IG N Co[s. VITIT] desig. [1X] 


IMPAVG « COS DES Imp. Aug... Cos. des 


RA Mae. 


For a similar milestone from Bithynia, cf. B.C_LH. XXV, 
p. 39 f. - 


78. In the fields near Chalabdé (fourteen hours west of 
Sinope), a Roman milestone, 1.68 m. in length; circumference 
at bottom, 0.95 m.; at top, 0.78 m. 


PROBO Probo 
PFINVICTOAVGPO P.F. invicto Aug. Po[nt. 
MAXTRIBPOTIIIIPR Maz. Trib. Pot. II. P.R. 
PROCASINOPBMP PRO. Casino P.B.M.P. 

ΡΝ aa Rs es Casino 
wMOVPRPRP PR PIP: 


79. In the same place as No. 78 another Roman milestone, 
1.49 m.long. Circumference at bottom 0.96 m.; at top, 0.82 τη. 
Two Christian crosses at the end of the inscription. I failed to 
make an accurate copy of this. The inscription is about the 
same as No. 78 and contains the name of the emperor Casinus. 


The published Latin inscriptions from Sinope are CLL.Z. III, 
238, 6977, 12219; 239, 6978; 240, 6981; 6979; 6980; 12220; 
12221; 12222; 144026; 14402 ὁ. 


330 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM OTHER PLACES WHICH MENTION 
SINOPEANS 1 ᾿ 


80. Athen. Mitt.VI (1881), p. 303 and Beilage 2. Inscription 
from Cleitor, giving a list of proxenot. Date, before the time of 
the Achaean League. The part relating to Sinope is as follows: 


Σ, νωπεῖς 
1ΠΠυππὸος Aape 
-ς Φιλάτπου 


καὶ ἔκγονοι 


81. Ἔφ.᾽ Αρχ. III (1884), p. 128, no.5; LG.VICCLG.S. 1), 
I, 414. Date, between the years 500 and 338 B.c. Inscription 
giving list of those who won in τὰ μεγάλα ᾿Αμφιαράϊα at Oropus. 
]. 24. ἀγενείους πυγμὴν 
1, 25. “Ἑστιαῖος Σιϊνωπεύς 


82. B.C_H. VI (1882), p. 225, no. 58; Jahrbuch, 42, 629; 
Collitz, Samml. der griech. Dialekt-Inschr. 11. 2624. Date, 240- 
200 B.c. Decree by the Delphians to grant wpofevia to a 
Sinopean, son of Μῆτρις. Μῆτρις is the right name, not Anun- 
τρίς or Δημήτριος : cf. Wilhelm, Arch. Epigr. Mitt. XX, p. 18. 
For name Μῆτρις cf. Dittenberger, Jnser. Orient. Gr. no. 299 ; 
Collitz, op. cit., 3029, 38; Latyschev, Pontische Inschriften, 
p- 67, col. 6, 1. 10. Attention has not been called to the in- 
scription found in Athens and published in the Athen. Mitt. 
XIII (1888), p. 429, Μῆτρις Νικάνδρου Σινωπεύς, which confirms 
the name Μῆτρις in the Delphian decree. Bourguet (Revue des 
Etudes Greeques, XVI, 1903, p. 96) would read [Καλλικράτει] 
Μήτριος in the Delphian decree. (Cf. No. 40, 1. δ.) 


83. CL. G. II, 2059. Decree of the Olbians to crown @eo- 
κλέα Σατύρου ἥρωα. Σινώπη stands at the’ end of the list of 
those who have already crowned him. 


1] omit inscriptions which give onlysthe man’s name, his father’s name, and 
ethnikon. These will all be included in the Prosopographia Sinopensis which 
the author expects soon to publish. 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 331 


84. Syllogos, II’, παράρτημα, p. 65, no. 6. Inscription 
found in Tomi. 


Σαραπίδ[ει. .. jos Πολυδώ[ρου] κατὰ ὄναρ Σινωπεύς 


85. Dittenberger, Sylloge*, 326; Michel, Recueil, p. 258, no. 
338. Found near Chersonesus. Date about 110 8.0. Decree to 
crown Diophantus, son of Asclapiodorus, the Sinopean and gen- 
eral of Mithradates the Great, for his many services in the wars 
against the Scythians. A bronzée-statue of him is to be set up. 


86. Latyschev (1901), Inscriptiones Antiquae Orae Sept. Ponti 
Euzxini, 1V, no. 72. Fragment which fits C.2G. 11, 21346. 
Proxeny decree in honor of T. Καώς Εὐτυχιανὸς Ναύκλαρος 
Σινωπεύς. In C.L.G. ibid. read Καίον for Ka[p ov. 


87. Cumont in Revue des Etudes Grecques, XV (1902), pp. 
332-333, no. 51. Found near Kavsa, now in Mersivan. 

Πρόκλος Σινω[ πεὺς ὑ)γι]είνας εὐχαρι[ στῶ ταῖς] | Nvu(u)das 
καὶ Πο[σειδῶνι}] | τῷ παντωφ(ε)λ[ίμῳ. ..} | κόπτ(ε)ιν πρεπίελι 
[πόδα ia]@n δὲ καὶ... [ αὐτοῦ συνφόρο!υς. Χρησστὸς Σινω- 
[meds] | λεθουργὸς ἐποίει 


88. Ο16. 891: 6. (61.4.9 Il, 2,1450. Found in Athens. 


Ποπίλλιος | [ΛΊ͵Ίουτατιανὸς | Σινωπεύς. vios ἸΠοπ(ιλλίου) Ov- 

a \ > , \ / fol e [4 Ul 

φικιανοῦ | dis ἀρχιερέως καὶ | Σηστίας Μαρκιανῆς | ἱερείας peya- 
Ans ᾿Αθηνᾶς. | ἐνθάδε κατάκειται | ἐτῶν κβ΄ 


89. LG. (C.LA.) III, 1, 129. Date, 248 a.p. List of 


victories won by Οὐαλέριος “Exdextos Σινωπεύς. βουλευτής. 


90. LG. 1V (CLP. 1.), 956. Found at Epidaurus. Date, 
224 a.p. Dedication by Tiberius Claudius Severus (Tif. Κλ. 
Leovnpos Σινωπεύς). who had been cured at Epidaurus, to 
Apollo Maleates and Asclepius. 


I add here five epigrams in honor of Sinopeans. 


91. Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca, 252. Found in Pantica- 
paeum. Relief of a man with a boy standing beside him. 


332 DAVID M. ROBINSON 


- 
Pharnaces, son of Pharnaces, ἃ Sinopean, died abroad and a 
cenotaph was set up for him at home. 


92. Kaibel, op. cit. 702. Found at Rome. Kopvovriwy died 
away from home at the age of two years, two months, and two 
weeks. 


93. Simonides, 101 (174). 


Σῆμα Θεόγνιδος εἰμὶ Σινωπέος. ᾧ μ᾽ ἐπέθηκεν 
Γλαῦκος ἑταιρείης ἀντὶ πολυχρόνου 


94, Anth. Plan. 111. 25. Epigram in honor of Damostratus 
the Sinopean, who won six times at the Isthmian games. 


95. Compte Rendu, 1877, p. 277. Epigram in honor of 
Menodorus, son of Apollonius, the Sinopean. 


96. Of the following inscription Dr. Wilhelm, secretary of 
the Austrian archaeological school in Athens, with much diffi- 
culty made a squeeze and a copy. With great generosity and 
kindness he has allowed me to give his copy here. The in- 
scription consists of thirty-four lines of more than sixty letters 
of very small size. It shows the relations between Sinope and 
Histiaea in the third century B.c. According to Dr. Wilhelm, 
the date of the inscription is the first half or middle of the 
third century B.c. For the first lines cf. Wilhelm, Hine Proze- 
nenliste an Histiaia, in the Arch.-Epigr. Mitt. aus Oester. 1891. 


ἔδοξεν | ὃ τῶι δήμωι" ἐπειδὴ Σινωπεῖς ἄποικοι... being on good 
terms with the Histiaeans and the λοιποὶ Ἕλληνες have sent 
an embassy to renew the old friendship. 1. 7, ovv[aé]|' τιοι 
γεγένηνται σωτηρίας. 1. 11, καὶ ὅτι ᾿Αρμοξένωι πολίτει ἡμετέρωι 
... [ἔδωκεν 7] | ?o δῆμος δωρεὰν τάλαντον περιποιούμενος τὴν 
πρὸς τὸν δῆμον τῶν ἹἹστιαιέων χάριν, καὶ | 2 τὴν προυπάρχουσαν — 
φιλίαν ταῖς πόλεσιν ἀνανεοῦνται κ.τ.λ. the ambassadors ask to 
set aside ἃ ὑπόμνημα δι(α)γφόρως ? | 15 γεγραμμένον καθελεῖν, τὰ 
φιλάνθρωπα διαφυλάττοντες κιτ.λ. In ll. 16/17 we have the 
well-known formula ὅπως | ἂν οὖν εἰδῇ ὁ δῆμος ὁ τῶν Σινωπέων 
ὅτι ἐπίσταται κ.τ.λ. (that the demos of Histiaea is always grate- 


INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 333 


ful to its friends for τὰ κοινὰ εὐεργετήματα and taking care καὶ 
κοινῆι τῆς πόλεως Kal ἰδίαι τῶν ἀφικνουμένων [εἰς ‘Iotiacav]). In 
]. 20 begins the answer given to the ambassadors of Sinope, 
ἀποκρίνασθαι | 3: μὲν τοῖς πρεσβευταῖς ὅτι ἡ πόλις οὐ μόνον πρὸς 
[τοὺς ἑαυτῆ ]ς γείτονας οἰκείως διάκειται ἀλλὰ | [κα]ὶ [τοῖ]ς Σινω- 
πε[ῦ]σιν ἐκ παλαιοῦ φίλοις καὶ ἀδελφοῖς... continues friendly, 
ete. After such phrases in lines 21-26, the decree runs as 
follows, 1. 27 —opic@a ἐξ ἴσου τά τε δίκαια καὶ τὰ φιλάνθρωπα 
ἐνννννννν τοῖς παραγενομένοις | ΞΒ Σινωπέων καθάπερ τοῖς ἰδίοις πο- 
λίταις καὶ εἶναι ἀσφάλειαν καὶ ἀσυλίαν τοῖς ἀφικνουμένοις 
Σινωπέων εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἢ εἰς τὸ ἐμ[ πόρ]ιο[ν ὃ ἔχει 7] ὁ δῆμος ἀπὸ 
Ἱστιαιέων | «at τῶν ἐνοικούντων: ὑπάρχειν δὲ Σινωπεῦσιν καὶ 
Ta λοιπὰ φιλάν ϑίθρωπα παρὰ τοῦ δήμου ὧν ἂν χρείαν ἔχωσιγ 
καὶ πρόσοδον πρὸς τὴν βουλὴν καὶ τὸν  Ξξδῆμον μετὰ τὰ ἱερὰ καὶ 
ἰσοτέλειαν καθάπερ καὶ ἹἹστιαιεῦσιν ἐν Σινώπηι" καλεῖν | Bdé καὶ 
ὅταν τὰ Σωτήρια θύηι ἡ πύλις ἐπὶ ξένια Σινωπέων τοὺς ἐν-ἐπιδη- 
μοῦντας. | *eivar δὲ καὶ τοὺς πρεσβευτὰς Μητ[ρ] 6 βι]ον Δει- 
viov (the first name is ποῦ sure), ᾿Επιχάρην Θεαρίωνος προξένους 
... the rest is lost. | 
DAvip M. ROBINSON. 


.- CORRIGENDA. 


Page 130,1. 3 of the notes. For ‘ belonged’ read ‘ belonged’. 
“ 139, note 2,1.8. For "Ν᾿ read ‘ M.’ 
“ 146,n. 5 and p.148,n.2. Before ‘ Eudocia’ read ‘ Ps.’ 
“ 276,1.13. For 343 read 313. 
“299, 1. 5; p. 300, ll. 21, 28. For ἀστύνομος read αστυνόμος. 
“ 301,1.3. For Ἡρακλειδὴης read Ἡρακλείδης. 
«303, 1. 3 of transcription; 1. 2 from foot; p. 304,1. 2. For ναζυδαμήνῳ 
read va[vda]unv@. 

Page 303, 1.11. For ᾽ Απολαυστὸς read ᾿Απόλαυστος. 

* 304,1.3. For Εὐρυδάμηνος read εὑὐρυδαμηνός. 

“ 304, 1. 2 from foot. For ‘Povgeivy read Ῥουφεῖνα. 

“ 305,1.6 of facsimile. The second letter should be N. 

“ 313,1.10. For Χορηγιώνος read Χορηγίωνος. 

“ 315, No. 45 and p. 327. For Φρουγὶς read Φροῦγις. 

* 316, last line. Omit sentence beginning ‘Strabo’, etc. 

“317, No. 50. For Πακάτος read Πακᾶτος. 

“ 319, No. 54. For ®:Ayo[iw read Φιλησ[ίῳ. 

* 319, No. 55. For Διωονυσοίο read Διονύσοιο. 

“ 319, No. 56. For Xaipic read Χαῖρις. ; 

“« 320,1.15 from foot. For ᾿Αμφιλόχω read ᾿Αμφιλόχῳ. 

** 323. Omit the last half of the first sentence after the inscription. 

“323. At end add “In ‘The Siege of Sinope’, a tragedy by Mrs. 
τις, acted in London in 1781 and based on the Italian Opera of ‘ Phar- 
naces’, Act. V, scene 4 f. is at the temple of Themis in Sinope”’. 

Page 325, No. 70 and p. 326, No. 71. For παραφαύστου read παρὰ Φαύστου. 

“ 327, No. 73. Transcribe L. Licin|nius Fr(u)|gi]h(ic) s(itus). Cf. 
p- 274. , 

Page 328, at end of first inscription. For ‘ Cae’ read [MJA€. ᾿ For the 
restoration of this inscription (No. 75) and the correction of next to last line, 
cf. p. 139, n. 2. 

Page 328, No. 76. For line 5 cf. p. 139, ἢ. 2. In place of the second M 
read N. 

Page 329, Nos. 77 and 78. For my corrected transcription cf. my article 
in Am, J. Arch. X (1906), No. 4 “ Mr. Van Buren’s Notes on Inscriptions from 
Sinope.” In]. 4 of the facsimile of No. 77 read IX for N. In 1. 4 of No. 78 
read Proc. A. Sinope M. P.andatend AB. In 1. 3 for R. read P. and in ll. 5,6 
read cujrante Ael. Casino A | tiano, v(iro) p(erfectissimo) pr(aeside) p(ro- 
vinciae) P(onti). 

Page 329. No. 79 will be published in A. J. P. XXVII, 4. For ‘Emperor 
Casinus’ read ‘ Praeses Casinus’,. 

Page 331,1.3. For Σαραπίδ[ι read Σαράπιδζι. 

“No. 86. For Kaioc read Κάιος, for Kaiov Κάιον. 
“332, No. 96. The correct reference to Wilhelm will be found on 
p. 249, note 6. 


= 


Ὁ 


hag 


4 DAY ‘USE © 
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BOR 


LOAN DEPT. 


Ὁ irtraeby cies \<. oF 
on the date to which renewed. r 


Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. Ὁ 


RES 61 REG, CIR.APR a Ξ 
ες REC'D Lp| eas 
σ΄ ὍὙ|ΟΗῈ 4 (96) | 
Beene DEC 28 19665 9 
RECEIVED 
DEC 2366-4 PM 
| LOAN DEPT. 
De RED ED ΕΠ Ὶ11|72) -9 PM4Q 
ΕΓ APRT 97 ὁ 
m -οὶ 57 ᾿ 
Κῶ ee 21A—50m-12,'60 seared ot! 
Ἐς Ἢ (B6221810)476B University of California 


